From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.5 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B65AAC433F5 for ; Thu, 16 Sep 2021 12:27:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [112.213.38.117]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3E2A760EE0 for ; Thu, 16 Sep 2021 12:27:46 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 mail.kernel.org 3E2A760EE0 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=fuzziesquirrel.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=lists.ozlabs.org Received: from boromir.ozlabs.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4H9GZ84dbxz2yWr for ; Thu, 16 Sep 2021 22:27:44 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=fuzziesquirrel.com header.i=@fuzziesquirrel.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=fm3 header.b=j5UUsdtT; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=fm3 header.b=XlOmq404; dkim-atps=neutral Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=fuzziesquirrel.com (client-ip=66.111.4.27; helo=out3-smtp.messagingengine.com; envelope-from=bradleyb@fuzziesquirrel.com; receiver=) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=fuzziesquirrel.com header.i=@fuzziesquirrel.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=fm3 header.b=j5UUsdtT; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=fm3 header.b=XlOmq404; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from out3-smtp.messagingengine.com (out3-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.27]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4H9GYJ5Kqkz2xvV for ; Thu, 16 Sep 2021 22:26:59 +1000 (AEST) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D85D5C025B; Thu, 16 Sep 2021 08:26:54 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 16 Sep 2021 08:26:54 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= fuzziesquirrel.com; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id :references:mime-version:content-type:in-reply-to; s=fm3; bh=1IL yBOoPs5+3FZdzzoGKDWUwFNm6w7r1aFFz6xOwF60=; b=j5UUsdtTxCohn0aiUij Ndx9TSzxJX9AQp6/7mB3tVTqMEo1wZ/ZxwsSSQsJZiYnB73nwLvAYyCWz7H3Yuq/ JvNlRgJ9tWAHvWkFLdHrpvWlKf0TEtHamZEZ1FhC2JPAVlzxM8byJ+4StQyvKpyn pGJbGXE1edt+a+ZDJ6xlVPdNrqa7JfBVNl7ySZ60ZNsbZDyLe3TU9si+F91XbJaR cS8C+0udBF2HscRNtsZMygTIYf2ZlkbnXdBO1VaC8eDw8k77/Qt0Z4KrAU8qGf1Y 3IwG3GvZWh+UuV3avwdIFrSE4A679AfQFxvDZaBxOALPAIWBGGv8ac+ewVFmYl9r aDA== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; bh=1ILyBO oPs5+3FZdzzoGKDWUwFNm6w7r1aFFz6xOwF60=; b=XlOmq404mYTWxhMfNNqRUl NwtOBXYvDi6Oty5FYLgPfHNLm4XXj/W7lw1oOvyIL1r1rdtMh0IZu/DMfNhp4GVk 90YY19ffLIgt3+EAnNsbH1DjpUdKeAj+Q2IjRQ7JwAiLjCqEZCu3KYk69P4lqjKo 2E9BJ1Lzskid/KIOu3E4gfoz0eTRQ8QbbH9xOjlQMvmuxBctjW22iFCwTXKorFnw HXweykoI6YcYrIwRtctIf3d9rrd7ileoZDQN+xQE2/tQ1GIDd2/V0et0GBQMmNiq cEBRMOIaFJJbnsHfLf6HOrikzkDWG4W6KfgIJY9L7BX2PLnGU6m2/LAqbli7WSNg == X-ME-Sender:

X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvtddrudehgedggeeiucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhepfffhvffukfhfgggtuggjsehttdertddttddvnecuhfhrohhmpeeurhgrugcu uehishhhohhpuceosghrrggulhgvhigssehfuhiiiihivghsqhhuihhrrhgvlhdrtghomh eqnecuggftrfgrthhtvghrnhepfeffhfefheeguddtvddtueeihfduieefkeefieefkeef udefueevudelgfekffefnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrg hilhhfrhhomhepsghrrggulhgvhigssehfuhiiiihivghsqhhuihhrrhgvlhdrtghomh X-ME-Proxy:

Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Thu, 16 Sep 2021 08:26:53 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2021 08:26:52 -0400 From: Brad Bishop To: George Liu Subject: Re: Question regarding phosphor-dbus-monitor repo Message-ID: <20210916122652.qi553jxvvvhtnkdn@cheese> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-BeenThere: openbmc@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Development list for OpenBMC List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Devender Rao , OpenBMC Maillist Errors-To: openbmc-bounces+openbmc=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "openbmc" Hi George On Thu, Sep 16, 2021 at 03:24:09PM +0800, George Liu wrote: >The current default configuration has the realization of `OCC` Hm. That probably shouldn't be in the default configuration. >1. Today the architecture of openBmc is gradually discarding YAML >files right (because I think it requires templates and py paarsing to >support). And because this technique has proven to make it difficult to support multiple configurations or combinations of hardware in a single image. For example, supporting two different revisions of the same board with minor differences. >2. I think we can migrate the functions of this repo to the >corresponding repo Sounds fine on the surface. Personally, I would like to see any and all configuration moved to entity manager, so it is all in the same place. Some system integrators are not software developers and do not want to hunt for configuration spread across different repositories or bitbake metadata layers. But the community is split on this - there is a concern with making every application have a dependency on entity-manager, which is an understandable concern. >I suspect that the original design idea was to aggregate all D-Bus >monitoring into this repo Sort of. The intent of the code was to provide a way to implement a wide variety of highly specific policy. For example: shut down the system when more than 4 processor cores are hotter than 100 degrees C if the chassis is water cooled. Policy that has broad applicability would be implemented closer to the application - so it wasn't really meant to aggregate _all_ policy in the system. Just the really esoteric stuff. In hindsight, I think it is too abstract and enables too much logic implemented with data. >4. At present, most repos use D-Bus to monitor certain attributes, >objectPaths, etc, but they have not done YAML file adaptation in this >repo, but implemented in their respective repos (eg: PLDM, >phosphor-led-manager). For the led applications, again, I would like to see those get their configuration from entity-manager. I don't think PLDM should have any configuration files at all. >So, my thoughts is: If we transplant `OCC` & `snmp` and other >functions to their respective repos one day in the future, can this >repo be discarded? Sure - my long term goal for IBM systems anyway is to not be using this application. If noone else in the OpenBMC community is using it - sure we could discard it entirely. -brad