Version and Functional FRU fields for motherboard and membuf

Version and Functional FRU fields for motherboard and membuf

[Alexander A. Filippov]

Hello everyone,

We get a failure running the "Validate FRU Properties Fields" test
because in our system we do not have "Version" and "Functional"
properties in the following nodes:

   /xyz/openbmc_project/inventory/system/chassis/motherboard
   /xyz/openbmc_project/inventory/system/chassis/motherboard/membuf*

However, we've examined the corresponding yaml files available in the
master branch for palmetto and witherspoon, and have not been able to
locate any mentions of those properties either.

Assuming that the aforementioned test passes for those systems, our
question is: where do those properties come from for them?

--
Alexander

Re: Version and Functional FRU fields for motherboard and membuf

[Alexander Amelkin]

[-- Attachment #1.1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1475 bytes --]

14.08.2018 05:36, Lei KM Yu wrote:
> Hi Alexander,
>
> 19.04.2018 17:11, Alexander A. Filippov wrote:
> > Hello everyone,
> >
> > We get a failure running the "Validate FRU Properties Fields" test
>
> May I ask what "Validate FRU Properties Fields" test is?
It's actually "Verify FRU Properties" and it's a part of
openbmc-test-automation test suite, see here:

https://github.com/openbmc/openbmc-test-automation/blob/ac687c43ddc7f639a4607ad89dd5ae462dcf65c9/tests/test_inventory.robot#L184

> > because in our system we do not have "Version" and "Functional"
> > properties in the following nodes:
> >
> >    /xyz/openbmc_project/inventory/system/chassis/motherboard
> >    /xyz/openbmc_project/inventory/system/chassis/motherboard/membuf*
> >
As I see, in the current version of the test you don't anymore look for
"Functional" property for those nodes, but "Version" is still checked.

> > However, we've examined the corresponding yaml files available in the
> > master branch for palmetto and witherspoon, and have not been able to
> > locate any mentions of those properties either.
> >
> > Assuming that the aforementioned test passes for those systems, our
> > question is: where do those properties come from for them?
>  
> As I see, Palmetto's yaml config does not have Version or Functional
> property for motherboard and membuf, so I do not think they will have
> such properties.
>  
So, does the test case pass for Palmetto?

[-- Attachment #1.1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 3385 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]

Re: Version and Functional FRU fields for motherboard and membuf

[Lei YU]

> It's actually "Verify FRU Properties" and it's a part of openbmc-test-automation test suite, see here:
>
> https://github.com/openbmc/openbmc-test-automation/blob/ac687c43ddc7f639a4607ad89dd5ae462dcf65c9/tests/test_inventory.robot#L184
>
> As I see, Palmetto's yaml config does not have Version or Functional property for motherboard and membuf, so I do not think they will have such properties.
>
> So, does the test case pass for Palmetto?

@Sivas Srr Could you check this?

Re: Version and Functional FRU fields for motherboard and membuf

[Alexander Amelkin]

>> It's actually "Verify FRU Properties" and it's a part of openbmc-test-automation test suite, see here:
>>
>> https://github.com/openbmc/openbmc-test-automation/blob/ac687c43ddc7f639a4607ad89dd5ae462dcf65c9/tests/test_inventory.robot#L184
>>
>> As I see, Palmetto's yaml config does not have Version or Functional property for motherboard and membuf, so I do not think they will have such properties.
>>
>> So, does the test case pass for Palmetto?

> @Sivas Srr Could you check this?

Sivas, Lei? Any chance to get an answer to this? The test still fails for us and we can't decide whether we should disable the test or add thos properties to motherboard and membuf objects.

By the way, what is at all the meaning and purpose of the 'Functional' property? Is it an indicator of a component functioning properly, or is it a 'handle' to turn a component off before hot removal/replacement?
There is no description anywhere that we could find.

Thank you.
Alexander.

Re: Version and Functional FRU fields for motherboard and membuf

[Lei YU]

On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 6:33 PM Alexander Amelkin <a.amelkin@yadro.com> wrote:
>
>
> Sivas, Lei? Any chance to get an answer to this? The test still fails for us and we can't decide whether we should disable the test or add thos properties to motherboard and membuf objects.
>
> By the way, what is at all the meaning and purpose of the 'Functional' property? Is it an indicator of a component functioning properly, or is it a 'handle' to turn a component off before hot removal/replacement?
> There is no description anywhere that we could find.

The `Functional` property means if a FRU is functional or not, e.g. if a DIMM
is plugged but has problem, it will be garded. At that time, the DIMM is
`Present`, but not `Functional`.

For this case, I think the test code shall be updated to skip the checks for
Functional, Version on specific FRU items.

Ping @Sivas again for comment.

Re: Version and Functional FRU fields for motherboard and membuf

[George Keishing]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2839 bytes --]

> By the way, what is at all the meaning and purpose of the 'Functional' 
property? Is it an indicator of a component functioning properly, or is it 
a 'handle' to turn a component off before hot removal/replacement?
>>>> Correct, the Field 'Functional' indicates the component is 
functioning.  so Functional is a 'status' and not a 'control'.

> There is no description anywhere that we could find.
>>>> You can look at the YAML state/ namespace for it
>>>> 
https://github.com/openbmc/phosphor-dbus-interfaces/blob/master/xyz/openbmc_project/State/Decorator/OperationalStatus.interface.yaml


The `Functional` property means if a FRU is functional or not, e.g. if a 
DIMM
is plugged but has problem, it will be garded. At that time, the DIMM is
`Present`, but not `Functional`.

For this case, I think the test code shall be updated to skip the checks 
for
Functional, Version on specific FRU items.
>>>> I looked at the code, so it expect if its present , its needs to be 
functional at least, but yes for the use case where it leads to `Present`, 
but not `Functional`,  there is no skipping logic for a given particular 
FRU's. 
>>>> Thinking out loud myself on this, test to add smarter logic checks to 
detect the garded FRU if there is standard method before its run and skip 
it.
>>>> If you open could up a ticket on 
https://github.com/openbmc/openbmc-test-automation/issues and describe 
more so that the test community can look at this and address the changes 
it may need.

Thanks and Regards,
   George Keishing




From:   Lei YU <mine260309@gmail.com>
To:     Alexander Amelkin <a.amelkin@yadro.com>
Cc:     OpenBMC Maillist <openbmc@lists.ozlabs.org>
Date:   09/21/2018 12:17 PM
Subject:        Re: Version and Functional FRU fields for motherboard and 
membuf
Sent by:        "openbmc" 
<openbmc-bounces+gkeishin=in.ibm.com@lists.ozlabs.org>



On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 6:33 PM Alexander Amelkin <a.amelkin@yadro.com> 
wrote:
>
>
> Sivas, Lei? Any chance to get an answer to this? The test still fails 
for us and we can't decide whether we should disable the test or add thos 
properties to motherboard and membuf objects.
>
> By the way, what is at all the meaning and purpose of the 'Functional' 
property? Is it an indicator of a component functioning properly, or is it 
a 'handle' to turn a component off before hot removal/replacement?
> There is no description anywhere that we could find.

The `Functional` property means if a FRU is functional or not, e.g. if a 
DIMM
is plugged but has problem, it will be garded. At that time, the DIMM is
`Present`, but not `Functional`.

For this case, I think the test code shall be updated to skip the checks 
for
Functional, Version on specific FRU items.

Ping @Sivas again for comment.






[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 5190 bytes --]

Re: Version and Functional FRU fields for motherboard and membuf

[Alexander Amelkin]

[-- Attachment #1.1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 885 bytes --]

21.09.2018 10:38, George Keishing wrote:
> > By the way, what is at all the meaning and purpose of the 'Functional' property? Is it an indicator of a component functioning properly, or is it a 'handle' to turn a component off before hot removal/replacement?
> >>>> Correct, the Field 'Functional' indicates the component is functioning.  so Functional is a 'status' and not a 'control'.
>
> > There is no description anywhere that we could find.
> >>>> You can look at the YAML state/ namespace for it
> >>>> https://github.com/openbmc/phosphor-dbus-interfaces/blob/master/xyz/openbmc_project/State/Decorator/OperationalStatus.interface.yaml

Yes, I've seen that. That's exactly what I call "no description". "Implement to indicate the operational status of the object" is not a decent description IMO as it's too sepulkarian (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sepulka).

Alex.

[-- Attachment #1.1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 2160 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]