|
| From: | Florian |
| Subject: | Re: [Freeipmi-devel] Fwd: ipmimonitoring-sensors.c discretereading workaround |
| Date: | Wed, 12 Dec 2018 12:27:11 +0100 |
Just to double check, ignore_non_interpretable_sensors is set to 0?
Al
On Tue, 2018-12-11 at 20:55 +0100, Florian wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Sure, here's the log: https://privatebin.florianstroeger.com/?77d4fd1
> 8f282d55e#K0MG3NEiH0+sZvFNo+s8F9zvm1DYTj3f6kU8OEjvtmQ=
>
> Florian
>
> On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 7:29 PM Albert Chu <address@hidden> wrote:
> > Hey Florian,
> >
> > Good, so atleast the "discrete reading" workaround works correctly
> > now.
> >
> > > With IPM_MONITORING_FLAGS_DEBUG I did not get any more logs, so I
> > did
> > > it with IPMI_MONITORING_FLAGS_DEBUG_IPMI_PACKETS.
> >
> > Could you set both of these with the or operator and re-run, i.e
> >
> > unsigned int ipmimonitoring_init_flags = IPM_MONITORING_FLAGS_DEBUG
> > |
> > IPMI_MONITORING_FLAGS_DEBUG_IPMI_PACKETS
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Al
> >
> >
> > On Tue, 2018-12-11 at 08:52 +0100, Florian wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> > > From: Florian <address@hidden>
> > > Date: Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 8:52 AM
> > > Subject: Re: [Freeipmi-devel] ipmimonitoring-sensors.c
> > > discretereading workaround
> > > To: Albert Chu <address@hidden>
> > >
> > >
> > > Hey Al,
> > >
> > > Thanks for the fast patch,
> > >
> > > We got at least a partial victory:
> > > After setting discrete_reading to 1, I got two of the PSU sensors
> > > working:
> > > 8, Power Supply 1, 8, Power Supply, Nominal, 45.00, W, 6Fh, 1h,
> > > 'Presence detected'
> > > 9, Power Supply 2, 9, Power Supply, Nominal, 40.00, W, 6Fh, 1h,
> > > 'Presence detected'
> > > Unfortunately sensor 5 (total power meter) doesn't show up.
> > >
> > > After setting record_ids[] to {5, 0} and record_ids_length = 1,
> > I
> > > only get the headers:
> > > Record ID, Sensor Name, Sensor Number, Sensor Type, Sensor State,
> > > Sensor Reading, Sensor Units, Sensor Event/Reading Type Code,
> > Sensor
> > > Event Bitmask, Sensor Event String
> > >
> > > Before your patch it looked like this:
> > > Record ID, Sensor Name, Sensor Number, Sensor Type, Sensor State,
> > > Sensor Reading, Sensor Units, Sensor Event/Reading Type Code,
> > Sensor
> > > Event Bitmask, Sensor Event String
> > > 5, Power Meter, 5, Current, N/A, N/A, N/A, 9h, 2h, 'Device
> > Enabled'.
> > >
> > > With IPM_MONITORING_FLAGS_DEBUG I did not get any more logs, so I
> > did
> > > it with IPMI_MONITORING_FLAGS_DEBUG_IPMI_PACKETS.
> > > I've pasted the logs for that to my privatebin again: https://pri
> > vate
> > >
> > bin.florianstroeger.com/?29b500374675145d#dqIOvHjjtK0FbooesKFeC5Ow2
> > fl
> > > dIWSyuWIRiNnzW+0=
> > >
> > > Florian
> > >
> > > On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 1:13 AM Al Chu <address@hidden> wrote:
> > > > Hey Florian,
> > > >
> > > > I have an experimental branch called ipmimonitoring-discrete-
> > > > reading on
> > > > github here:
> > > >
> > > > https://github.com/chu11/freeipmi-mirror/tree/ipmimonitoring-di
> > scre
> > > > te-r
> > > > eading
> > > >
> > > > ./autogen.sh
> > > > ./configure
> > > > make
> > > > make install
> > > > re-compile ipmimonitoring-sensors.c and try it out
> > > >
> > > > LMK if you need help, like getting to the right branch. If you
> > > > can't
> > > > make install, LMK and I can show you some linker tricks.
> > > >
> > > > Al
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, 2018-12-05 at 20:34 +0100, Florian wrote:
> > > > > Hey Al,
> > > > >
> > > > > That's awesome!
> > > > >
> > > > > Sure, I'm totally OK with a git repo. As long as I just need
> > to
> > > > do
> > > > > configure and make I can do it.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks for looking into this so fast!
> > > > >
> > > > > Florian
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, Dec 5, 2018 at 8:26 PM Albert Chu <address@hidden>
> > wrote:
> > > > > > Hey Florian,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Ok, I think I found a bug. The "discrete reading" flag is
> > > > passed
> > > > > > to an
> > > > > > underlying library correctly, but the result is not stored
> > in
> > > > > > libipmimonitoring correctly. I don't remember how this
> > > > workaround
> > > > > > works 100%, because I never had this motherboard.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Once I look into this, how would like to be able to test?
> > Will
> > > > > > pointing you to a github repo be ok?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > For my personal notes for later: see
> > > > > > _digital_sensor_reading() and _specific_sensor_reading(),
> > store
> > > > > > sensor
> > > > > > reading result and possibly units and other things too.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Al
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Wed, 2018-12-05 at 10:59 +0100, Florian wrote:
> > > > > > > Hey Albert,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The changeing of record_ids and record_ids_length showed
> > the
> > > > > > sensor 5
> > > > > > > (but no data) like this
> > > > > > > Record ID, Sensor Name, Sensor Number, Sensor Type,
> > Sensor
> > > > State,
> > > > > > > Sensor Reading, Sensor Units, Sensor Event/Reading Type
> > Code,
> > > > > > Sensor
> > > > > > > Event Bitmask, Sensor Event String
> > > > > > > 5, Power Meter, 5, Current, N/A, N/A, N/A, 9h, 2h,
> > 'Device
> > > > > > Enabled'.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > IPMI_MONITORING_FLAGS_DEBUG unfortunately did not add ANY
> > > > more
> > > > > > logs
> > > > > > > at all, so I tried with
> > > > IPMI_MONITORING_FLAGS_DEBUG_IPMI_PACKETS
> > > > > > > which gave me more logs.
> > > > > > > Those are quite a lot of more lines, so I pasted it into
> > my
> > > > > > > privatebin: https://privatebin.florianstroeger.com/?58387
> > 298f
> > > > 9b91
> > > > > > 3c4#
> > > > > > > CkDCOMP5eFXOs6Whn+giWtidWNhMZGrkhc3tXYPaK9o=
> > > > > > > I also tried setting discrete_reading to 1 as the sensor
> > 5
> > > > was
> > > > > > > visible with record_ids, but that did output the same
> > > > results.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Florian
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Wed, Dec 5, 2018 at 12:07 AM Albert Chu <address@hidden
> > v>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > Hey Florian,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Lets try:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > unsigned int record_ids[] = {5,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > 0};
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > unsigned int record_ids_length = 1;
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > unsigned int ipmimonitoring_init_flags =
> > > > > > > > IPMI_MONITORING_FLAGS_DEBUG;
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Al
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Tue, 2018-12-04 at 20:16 +0100, Florian wrote:
> > > > > > > > > Oops, I'm sorry, Android-Mail apparently deleted the
> > > > CC...
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I compiled with ipmimonitoring_init_flags = 1 now and
> > got
> > > > > > debug
> > > > > > > > stuff
> > > > > > > > > this time.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > The output is following...
> > > > > > > > > (ipmi_monitoring_sensor_reading.c,
> > > > > > > > > ipmi_monitoring_get_sensor_reading, 1061):
> > record_type
> > > > '0xC0'
> > > > > > not
> > > > > > > > > supported
> > > > > > > > > (ipmi_monitoring_sensor_reading.c,
> > > > _get_sensor_bitmask_type,
> > > > > > > > 752):
> > > > > > > > > event_reading_type_code '0x70' bitmask is OEM
> > > > > > > > > (ipmi_monitoring_sensor_reading.c,
> > > > _get_sensor_bitmask_type,
> > > > > > > > 752):
> > > > > > > > > event_reading_type_code '0x71' bitmask is OEM
> > > > > > > > > (ipmi_monitoring_sensor_reading.c,
> > > > _get_sensor_bitmask_type,
> > > > > > > > 752):
> > > > > > > > > event_reading_type_code '0x71' bitmask is OEM
> > > > > > > > > (ipmi_monitoring_sensor_reading.c,
> > > > > > > > > ipmi_monitoring_get_sensor_reading, 1061):
> > record_type
> > > > '0x8'
> > > > > > not
> > > > > > > > > supported
> > > > > > > > > (ipmi_monitoring_sensor_reading.c,
> > > > > > > > > ipmi_monitoring_get_sensor_reading, 1061):
> > record_type
> > > > '0x8'
> > > > > > not
> > > > > > > > > supported
> > > > > > > > > (ipmi_monitoring_sensor_reading.c,
> > _get_sensor_reading,
> > > > 356):
> > > > > > > > > ipmi_sensor_read: sensor reading unavailable
> > > > > > > > > (ipmi_monitoring_sensor_reading.c,
> > > > _threshold_sensor_reading,
> > > > > > > > 571):
> > > > > > > > > cannot read sensor for record id '23'
> > > > > > > > > (ipmi_monitoring_sensor_reading.c,
> > _get_sensor_reading,
> > > > 356):
> > > > > > > > > ipmi_sensor_read: sensor reading unavailable
> > > > > > > > > (ipmi_monitoring_sensor_reading.c,
> > > > _threshold_sensor_reading,
> > > > > > > > 571):
> > > > > > > > > cannot read sensor for record id '24'
> > > > > > > > > (ipmi_monitoring_sensor_reading.c,
> > _get_sensor_reading,
> > > > 356):
> > > > > > > > > ipmi_sensor_read: sensor reading unavailable
> > > > > > > > > (ipmi_monitoring_sensor_reading.c,
> > > > _threshold_sensor_reading,
> > > > > > > > 571):
> > > > > > > > > cannot read sensor for record id '38'
> > > > > > > > > (ipmi_monitoring_sensor_reading.c,
> > _get_sensor_reading,
> > > > 356):
> > > > > > > > > ipmi_sensor_read: sensor reading unavailable
> > > > > > > > > (ipmi_monitoring_sensor_reading.c,
> > > > _threshold_sensor_reading,
> > > > > > > > 571):
> > > > > > > > > cannot read sensor for record id '39'
> > > > > > > > > (ipmi_monitoring_sensor_reading.c,
> > _get_sensor_reading,
> > > > 356):
> > > > > > > > > ipmi_sensor_read: sensor reading unavailable
> > > > > > > > > (ipmi_monitoring_sensor_reading.c,
> > > > _threshold_sensor_reading,
> > > > > > > > 571):
> > > > > > > > > cannot read sensor for record id '40'
> > > > > > > > > (ipmi_monitoring_sensor_reading.c,
> > _get_sensor_reading,
> > > > 356):
> > > > > > > > > ipmi_sensor_read: sensor reading unavailable
> > > > > > > > > (ipmi_monitoring_sensor_reading.c,
> > > > _threshold_sensor_reading,
> > > > > > > > 571):
> > > > > > > > > cannot read sensor for record id '41'
> > > > > > > > > Record ID, Sensor Name, Sensor Number, Sensor Type,
> > > > Sensor
> > > > > > State,
> > > > > > > > > Sensor Reading, Sensor Units, Sensor Event/Reading
> > Type
> > > > Code,
> > > > > > > > Sensor
> > > > > > > > > Event Bitmask, Sensor Event String
> > > > > > > > > ipmi_monitoring_sensor_read_sensor_bitmask_strings:
> > > > success
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I'm unfortunately don't know much about C. You mean I
> > > > should
> > > > > > > > change
> > > > > > > > > in 'unsigned int record_ids[] = {0};' the 0 to a
> > sensor-
> > > > id,
> > > > > > > > right?
> > > > > > > > > Because I did this and that neither worked with
> > putting 5
> > > > in
> > > > > > for
> > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > power meter nor with any other sensor.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Florian
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Tue, Dec 4, 2018 at 7:47 PM Albert Chu <address@hidden
> > .gov
> > > > >
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > Didn't see your output, I guess you forgot to paste
> > it
> > > > in.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Hmmmm. That means the main monitoring code is just
> > > > > > returning
> > > > > > > > "0",
> > > > > > > > > > i.e.
> > > > > > > > > > 0 sensors read. Could you try experimenting with
> > the
> > > > > > settings
> > > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > > setting "record_ids" to the record we're trying to
> > > > figure
> > > > > > out
> > > > > > > > (i
> > > > > > > > > > think
> > > > > > > > > > it was #5 in your prior post). Lets just
> > concentrate
> > > > on
> > > > > > that
> > > > > > > > > > specific
> > > > > > > > > > record and try to figure out what's going on. Also
> > set
> > > > > > > > > > ipmimonitoring_init_flags for more debugging and
> > lets
> > > > see
> > > > > > what
> > > > > > > > gets
> > > > > > > > > > output.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > BTW, could you please respond to the mailing list.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Al
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > On Tue, 2018-12-04 at 07:50 +0100, Florian Ströger
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > Hello Albert,
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for the fast reply!
> > > > > > > > > > > I've set 'int ignore_non_interpretable_sensors'
> > to 0,
> > > > but
> > > > > > > > when I
> > > > > > > > > > run
> > > > > > > > > > > the binary now it just outputs the headers, like
> > > > this:
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > > Albert Chu
> > > > > > > > > > address@hidden
> > > > > > > > > > Computer Scientist
> > > > > > > > > > High Performance Systems Division
> > > > > > > > > > Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > Albert Chu
> > > > > > > > address@hidden
> > > > > > > > Computer Scientist
> > > > > > > > High Performance Systems Division
> > > > > > > > Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Albert Chu
> > > > > > address@hidden
> > > > > > Computer Scientist
> > > > > > High Performance Systems Division
> > > > > > Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Florian Ströger
> > > Zur Rossschwemme 5
> > > 3452 Atzenbrugg
> > > ****************************
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Freeipmi-devel mailing list
> > > address@hidden
> > > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/freeipmi-devel
> > --
> > Albert Chu
> > address@hidden
> > Computer Scientist
> > High Performance Systems Division
> > Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
> >
> >
>
>
--
Albert Chu
address@hidden
Computer Scientist
High Performance Systems Division
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
| [Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |