[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Freeipmi-users] problem with freeipmi 0.5.3 and intel SE7221B
From: |
Al Chu |
Subject: |
Re: [Freeipmi-users] problem with freeipmi 0.5.3 and intel SE7221BK1-E |
Date: |
Mon, 21 Jan 2008 11:40:18 -0800 |
Hey Bala,
How can we go about debugging this?
Al
On Mon, 2008-01-21 at 03:56 -0800, Bala.A wrote:
> Hi Al,
>
> I think, there is no such device address 42 and 84. I suspect a bug in
> SSIF device driver code.
>
> Regards,
> Bala
>
> >>
> >> address@hidden:~# bmc-info --no-probing -D SSIF --driver-address=42
> >> --driver-device=/dev/i2c-0 --register-spacing=1
> >> ipmi-ssif-api-udm.c: 81: ipmi_ssif_cmd_udm: errnum (4): expression
> >> failed
> >> ipmi_cmd_get_device_id: permission denied
> >>
> >> address@hidden:~# bmc-info --no-probing -D SSIF --driver-address=84
> >> --driver-device=/dev/i2c-0 --register-spacing=1
> >> ipmi-ssif-api-udm.c: 81: ipmi_ssif_cmd_udm: errnum (4): expression
> >> failed
> >> ipmi_cmd_get_device_id: permission denied
> >
> > Bala, FYI line 81 is a call to 'ipmi_ssif_write'.
> >
> > errnum 4 in the ssif lib is IPMI_SSIF_CTX_ERR_PERMISSION.
> >
> > the errnum seems to be set via this code chunk:
> >
> > if (buf_len <= IPMI_I2C_SMBUS_BLOCK_MAX)
> > {
> > count = ipmi_ssif_single_part_write (ctx->device_fd,
> > buf,
> > buf_len);
> > }
> > else
> > {
> > count = ipmi_ssif_multi_part_write (ctx->device_fd,
> > buf,
> > buf_len);
> > }
> >
> > if (count < 0)
> > {
> > if (errno == EACCES || errno == EPERM)
> > ctx->errnum = IPMI_SSIF_CTX_ERR_PERMISSION;
> > else
> > ERR_LOG(ctx->errnum = IPMI_SSIF_CTX_ERR_SYSTEM_ERROR);
> > goto cleanup;
> > }
> >
> > tracing this into the deeper write calls, the errno is coming from the
> > core ioctl() call for ssif.
> >
> > It looks like Chris is root above, so EACCES is not the likely returned
> > errno, EPERM = "Operation Not Permitted" is. So the question is why is
> > the ioctl not allowed.
> >
>
--
Albert Chu
address@hidden
925-422-5311
Computer Scientist
High Performance Systems Division
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
- Re: [Freeipmi-users] problem with freeipmi 0.5.3 and intel SE7221BK1-E, (continued)
- Re: [Freeipmi-users] problem with freeipmi 0.5.3 and intel SE7221BK1-E, Chris Morgan, 2008/01/23
- Re: [Freeipmi-users] problem with freeipmi 0.5.3 and intel SE7221BK1-E, Al Chu, 2008/01/23
- Re: [Freeipmi-users] problem with freeipmi 0.5.3 and intel SE7221BK1-E, Chris Morgan, 2008/01/23
- Re: [Freeipmi-users] problem with freeipmi 0.5.3 and intel SE7221BK1-E, Al Chu, 2008/01/23
- Re: [Freeipmi-users] problem with freeipmi 0.5.3 and intel SE7221BK1-E, Chris Morgan, 2008/01/23
- Re: [Freeipmi-users] problem with freeipmi 0.5.3 and intel SE7221BK1-E, Al Chu, 2008/01/23
- Re: [Freeipmi-users] problem with freeipmi 0.5.3 and intel SE7221BK1-E, Al Chu, 2008/01/23
- Re: [Freeipmi-users] problem with freeipmi 0.5.3 and intel SE7221BK1-E, Al Chu, 2008/01/24
- Re: [Freeipmi-users] problem with freeipmi 0.5.3 and intel SE7221BK1-E, Bala.A, 2008/01/21
- Re: [Freeipmi-users] problem with freeipmi 0.5.3 and intel SE7221BK1-E, Bala.A, 2008/01/21
- Re: [Freeipmi-users] problem with freeipmi 0.5.3 and intel SE7221BK1-E,
Al Chu <=
- Re: [Freeipmi-users] problem with freeipmi 0.5.3 and intel SE7221BK1-E, Al Chu, 2008/01/24