Re: D-Bus interface to provide data to entity manager

[Deepak Kodihalli <dkodihal@linux.vnet.ibm.com>]

On 27/05/20 8:55 pm, Thomaiyar, Richard Marian wrote:
> 
> On 5/27/2020 7:28 PM, Deepak Kodihalli wrote:
>> On 27/05/20 7:20 pm, Thomaiyar, Richard Marian wrote:
>>> I always view D-Bus interface as a specification / API which can work 
>>> with different producers / consumers (correct me, if that's not what 
>>> we intend with D-Bus interface here). Problem with Option 1 is, it 
>>> will end up in having multiple producers exposing different 
>>> interface, and thereby consumers(user interface facing applications) 
>>> of D-Bus must be aware about all the D-Bus interfaces and always 
>>> requires change.
>>>
>>> Consider, we want to expose ChassisType, then irrespective of PLDM 
>>> FRU / IPMI FRU / Proprietary FRU, Consumer applications must read it 
>>> in the same manner. Having different interface / property types, 
>>> requires update in both the end. PLDM FRU / IPMI FRU can be in common 
>>> form (except few nit's /OEM's). We need to make sure it is 
>>> represented in that angle. As of today phosphor-dbus-interfaces 
>>> doesn't have FRU interface, but it has inventory related interfaces 
>>> (exposed by Entity-Manager), which is what Redfish uses (i.e. 
>>> Indirectly the FruDevice exposed interface is hidden by 
>>> Entity-manager, and inventory interface exposed by entity-manager is 
>>> used).
>>>
>>> As of today, entity-manager doesn't add Inventory interface 
>>> automatically for Add-on cards (which doesn't have any json 
>>> configuration), but needs exposure (say PLDM based Add on card 
>>> devices will be of this type), but shouldn't be hard to add it anyway.
>>>
>>> Now the question is do we want to expose FRU as a separate interafce 
>>> to be used in User facing application, or shall we just use Inventory 
>>> based interface itself ?If inventory itself can be used, then let's 
>>> go ahead and add more fields to those if missing anything / correct 
>>> the same accordingly.
>>>
>>> James, Deepak, Patrick - your thoughts ?
>>
>> I guess there is a difference between FRU and inventory. If inventory 
>> interfaces could be used directly, why wouldn't the FruDevice or PLDM 
>> apps directly host inventory objects, why even use EM?
>>
> [Richard]: Inventory.Decorator is used in Redfish. i.e. Today Frudevice 
> & it's interface exposed is consumed by Entity-Manager alone & Entity 
> manager exposes all the needed configuration along with 
> Inventory.Decorator.Asset interface. (As you stated, inventory does more 
> than what FRU has to expose, but i am trying to see can we use 
> Inventory.Decorator itself to expose these needed FRU information?). 
> James F ? (Maintainer of both EM & bmcweb)
> 
> Current Behavior:
> 
> Say - Baseboard fru information is exposed by FruDevice, and Entity 
> Manager exposes the sensor or any configuration required for platform A 
> or Platform B (based on fru device data). Entity-manager also expose 
> Inventory interface which hides the manufacturer name exposed by FRU, 
> but exposes the it as Manufacturer in the Inventory interface and 
> Redfish uses this).
> 
> In case of exposing the PLDM FRU
> 
> Option 1:
> 
> If we need to rely on PLDM FRU, then Entity-Manager will probe the 
> FruDevice data exposed by PLDM FRU daemon, and expose the inventory 
> (both for sensor configuration and decorator Asset), we don't change any 
> upper layer application. We can follow the same design for the PLDM FRU 
> daemon.

Yes, the question remains as to what kind of D-Bus interface does the 
PLDM daemon use. Make it's own, similar to xyz.openbmc_project.FruDevice 
(which the FruDevice daemon makes), or use a PLDM specific one (for 
which I have a patch on Gerrit), or use a common interface that can be 
used by both FruDevice and PLDM.

> Note: Currently, it doesn't have a mechanism to expose all the FRU 
> devices as Inventory.Decorator interface automatically when there is no 
> json configuration for it in EM. This needs to be fixed (say for PLDM 
> based Add-on card).
> 
> Option 2:
> 
> Define new FRU interface (common for both PLDM, IPMI etc.), similar to 
> inventory and this itself will be used by both Entity-manager & user 
> level interface application (say Redfish).

I didn't intend this to be something that describes inventory, but 
rather a common (to PLDM, FruDevice, other apps) alternative to 
xyz.openbmc_project.FruDevice, which is what the FruDevice daemon hosts 
on D-Bus today. EM can continue to make objects that implement 
xyz.openbmc_project.Inventory.Foo interfaces, since they represent 
inventory information.


> (Problem with option 2 is it requires changes in Currenr behavior, and 
> redfish etc, may need to update it's code to use the common FRU 
> interface rather than inventory.Decorator).
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Richard
> 
>> I believe these apps (FruDevice, PLDM daemon) operate at a per FRU 
>> level, and rely on something like EM to make one or more inventory 
>> objects based on the FRU data. So that was my option 2, a generic FRU 
>> properties interface. I'm just not sure at the moment the 
>> impact/interest of doing something like that and then aligning 
>> FruDevice and EM to the same.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Deepak
>>
>>>
>>> regards,
>>>
>>> Richard