All of
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Heyi Guo <>
To: John Wang <>
Cc: Zhikui Ren <>,
	Jae Hyun Yoo <>,
	Vernon Mauery <>,
	OpenBMC Maillist <>,
	Ed Tanous <>, Josh Lehan <>,
	Ed Tanous <>,
	Patrick Venture <>
Subject: Re: [Phishing Risk] [External] Re: Does it make sense to create a centralized fan control module?
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2021 19:03:49 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <>

Hi John,

Thanks for your reply. Please see my comments inline.

On 2021/6/16 上午10:49, John Wang wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 16, 2021 at 10:02 AM Heyi Guo <> wrote:
>> Hi All,
>> Any comments for my questions at the top of this thread?
>> Thanks,
>> Heyi
>> On 2021/6/11 上午9:23, Heyi Guo wrote:
>>> Please ignore my early emails; only this one is the final version. I
>>> must have misused some shortcut key to send the unfinished versions
>>> while I wanted to save it locally...
>>> Sorry for the noise.
>>> Heyi
>>> On 2021/6/11 上午9:14, Heyi Guo wrote:
>>>> Hi All,
>>>> Right now fan related data like tacho and PWM is fetched in
>>>> dbus-sensors, and published to d-bus as sensor data, while fan
>>>> control is made in another module like pid-control, which can fetch
>>>> data and set value via d-bus.
>>>> In some common sense, we may think about putting all fan related work
>>>> into one single module (which may be based on pid-control), i.e. it
>>>> can read tacho and PWM from hardware directly, calculate the required
> As I understand it, if you just want to bypass dbus and read pwm/tach
> directly you can refer to this.

Do you suggest to use sysfs interface to access pwm/tach? However, we 
are using a I2C centralized fan controller and we don't have 
corresponding kernel driver for it. We propose to access this device by 
using /dev/i2c-<bus> interface directly in user mode.

>>>> PWM by some algorithm like PID, and then write to PWM hardware
>>>> directly; the data will also be published to d-bus for other modules
>>>> to consume, like fansensor from dbus-sensors.
>>>> Does it make sense to do that? Or is there any reason for the current
>>>> design?
> I don't know why it's designed this way, but are you experiencing any problems?
Not really.
> According to our past experience, pid-control reads/writes pwm/tach
> quite smoothly,
> but pid-control has some trouble reading the temperature of some
> sensors via dbus.(eg psusensors).
> That's another topic...

As I mentioned above, there is no sysfs interface for fan pwm/tach on 
our platform. We can only rely on dbus interfaces if using the upstream 
phosphor-pid-control. Then we think about centralizing all fan related 
hardware access into one module (like pid-control), but not sure if 
there's any problem for this idea.



>>>> I'm new to OpenBMC and some of my understanding may be totally wrong.
>>>> Looking forward to your expert advice.
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Heyi

  reply	other threads:[~2021-06-16 11:04 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-06-11  1:14 Heyi Guo
2021-06-11  1:23 ` Heyi Guo
2021-06-16  2:02   ` Heyi Guo
2021-06-16  2:49     ` [Phishing Risk] [External] " John Wang
2021-06-16 11:03       ` Heyi Guo [this message]
2021-06-16 16:26 ` Ed Tanous
2021-06-20  8:48   ` Heyi Guo

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \
    --subject='Re: [Phishing Risk] [External] Re: Does it make sense to create a centralized fan control module?' \

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.