Re: Target name refactoring

[Andrew Geissler <geissonator@gmail.com>]

ok so refactored action targets and their relationships would look like this

obmc-host-start
  -> Requires: obmc-chassis-power-on

obmc-host-shutdown
  -> Requires: obmc-host-stop
    -> Requires: obmc-chassis-power-off

The synch targets would follow similar conventions, I may break that
into a separate task since the action targets are what users interact
with and I'd like to get done ASAP.

Andrew

On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 3:31 PM, Rick Altherr <raltherr@google.com> wrote:
> I prefer the second.
>
> On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 10:24 AM, Brad Bishop <bradleyb@fuzziesquirrel.com>
> wrote:
>>
>>
>> > On Feb 24, 2017, at 11:41 AM, Rick Altherr <raltherr@google.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > nit: stop is a verb. Stopped is a state.
>>
>> Right.  So using one of the conventions below we’d have either:
>>
>> obmc-stop-host
>> obmc-host-stopped
>>
>> or
>>
>> obmc-host-stop
>> obmc-host-stopped
>>
>> I’m guessing the first person to reply with a preference will probably
>> win.
>>
>> >
>> > On Feb 24, 2017 5:59 AM, "Brad Bishop" <bradleyb@fuzziesquirrel.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > > On Feb 21, 2017, at 10:00 PM, Joel Stanley <joel@jms.id.au> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 8:50 AM, Andrew Geissler
>> > > <geissonator@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > >> Some design decisions came out of my last set of changes in the
>> > >> OpenBMC state area.  There was a proposal to rename our targets
>> > >> responsible for booting and powering on/off the system.
>> > >>
>> > >> Currently we have this:
>> > >> - PowerOn: obmc-power-chassis-on.target    obmc-chassis-start.target
>> > >> - PowerOff: obmc-power-chassis-off.target    obmc-chassis-stop.target
>> > >>  obmc-stop-host.target
>> > >>
>> > >> The obmc-power-chassis-*.targets are responsible for doing whatever
>> > >> is
>> > >> required to apply pgood to the chassis.
>> > >> The obmc-chassis-*.targets are responsible for starting and stopping
>> > >> all host related services
>> > >> The obmc-stop-host.target is where we have the soft power off service
>> > >> (notify host of shutdown, wait for host to shutdown gracefully)
>> > >>
>> > >> Refactoring Proposal:
>> > >> - First the chassis-start and chassis-stop target names don’t make
>> > >> sense anymore with the new bmc, chassis, and host state break down’s
>> > >> so:
>> > >>  - Rename obmc-chassis-start.target to obmc-start-host.target
>> > >>  - Rename obmc-chassis-stop.target to obmc-stop-host.target
>> > >>  - Rename the current obmc-stop-host.target to
>> > >> obmc-shutdown-host.target
>> > >
>> > > Can I suggest putting the host before the action?
>> > >
>> > > obmc-host-stop
>> > > obmc-host-start
>> > > obmc-host-shutdown
>> >
>> > We have two types of targets, synchronization targets (for example
>> > network-pre.target),
>> > and action targets(for example multi-user.target).  Sync targets are not
>> > directly
>> > start/stoppable - they have to be started implicitly by systemd.  I
>> > would like a way
>> > to be able to tell which one I am looking at from the name.  For
>> > example:
>> >
>> > obmc-stop-host # Action - stop the host.
>> > obmc-host-stop # Sync - the host has been stopped.
>> >
>> > I had proposed this obmc-[verb]-[what] for actions and
>> > obmc-[what]-[state] to Andrew
>> > privately..I’m fine with something else, again, as long as it is
>> > consistent.
>> >
>> > I can think of two conventions:
>> >
>> > obmc-[verb]-[what] for actions
>> > obmc-[what]-[state] for sync points
>> >
>> > or
>> >
>> > obmc-[what]-[verb] for actions
>> > obmc-[what]-[state] for sync points
>> >
>> > Either one is fine with me.  The former seems slightly easier to
>> > distinguish between
>> > the two.
>> >
>> > >
>> > >>
>> > >> The target relationships are then the following:
>> > >>
>> > >> obmc-host-start.target requires obmc-power-chassis-on.target
>> > >> obmc-shutdown-host.target requires obmc-stop-host.target requires
>> > >> obmc-power-chassis-off.target
>> > >
>> > > obmc-host-start requires obmc-chassis-poweron
>> > >
>> > > obmc-host-shutdown requires obmc-host-stop requires
>> > > obmc-chassis-poweroff
>> > >
>> > > I think the rest of your proposal sounds good, from what I understand.
>> > >
>> > > Cheers,
>> > >
>> > > Joel
>> > >
>> > >>
>> > >> When a system goes to the quiesce target, the host state manager will
>> > >> call the obmc-stop-host.target.  Otherwise, the host state service
>> > >> will call the obmc-shutdown-host.target when power off is requested.
>> > >>
>> > >> Thoughts/Comments?
>> > >> Andrew
>
>