#450 Document notation of PEF threshold states

[Yogindar]

Found the following log in one of the server with ipmitool

11 | active | 0x11 | Temperature | Any | Critical | Threshold |
(0x01/0x0204),<LC,<UC | Alert | 1

As per the log Lower non critical - going low and upper critical going high states are configured.
As per the code

pef_b2s_gentype_1 = {
BIT_DESC_MAP_LIST,
{ {"<LNC", 0}, / '<' : getting worse /
{">LNC", 1}, / '>' : getting better /
{"<lc", 2},="" {"="">LC", 3},
{"<lnr", 4},="" {"="">LNR", 5},
{">UNC", 6},
{"<unc", 7},="" {"="">UC", 8},
{"<uc", 9},="" {"="">UNR", 10},
{"<UNR", 11},
{NULL}
} };</uc",></unc",></lnr",></lc",>

The bit 6 onwards the representation is wrong?

it should be
pef_b2s_gentype_1 = {
BIT_DESC_MAP_LIST,
{ {"<LNC", 0}, / '<' : getting worse /
{">LNC", 1}, / '>' : getting better /
{"<lc", 2},="" {"="">LC", 3},
{"<lnr", 4},="" {"="">LNR", 5},
** {"<unc", 6},="" {"="">UNC", 7},
{"<uc", 8},="" {"="">UC", 9},
{"<unr", 10},="" {"="">UNR", 11},**
{NULL}
} };</unr",></uc",></unc",></lnr",></lc",>

Upper critical going high action is configured >UC denotes better than <UC.

[Zdenek Styblik]

Hello,

I hope somebody else will back me up and confirm, but the representation is correct despite it looks otherwise.

5 is ideal state/number, eg. temperature.
If something is above limit and going high, it's going worse, eg. 5 -> 10.
If something is above limit and going low, it's going better, eg. 10 -> 5.
If something is below limit and going low, it's going worse, eg. 5 -> 0.
If something is below limit and going high, it's going better, eg. 0 -> 5.

I hope it makes sense. It took me couple minutes to realize. I did give a look to p. 503(p. 529 in PDF) in IPMIv2 specifiaction, section 42.1, table Generic Event/Reading Type Codes. Picture at p. 465(p. 491 in PDF) which explains hysteresis might explain this ... better.

Z.

[Yogindar]

Hi, The explanation looks good. I was confused the representation was for value based comparison. Are there any documentation detailing the same? Regards, Yogindar

On Friday, July 8, 2016 11:27 PM, Zdenek Styblik <stybla@users.sf.net> wrote:

Hello,I hope somebody else will back me up and confirm, but the representation is correct despite it looks otherwise.5 is ideal state/number, eg. temperature.
If something is above limit and going high, it's going worse, eg. 5 -> 10.
If something is above limit and going low, it's going better, eg. 10 -> 5.
If something is below limit and going low, it's going worse, eg. 5 -> 0.
If something is below limit and going high, it's going better, eg. 0 -> 5.I hope it makes sense. It took me couple minutes to realize. I did give a look to p. 503(p. 529 in PDF) in IPMIv2 specifiaction, section 42.1, table Generic Event/Reading Type Codes. Picture at p. 465(p. 491 in PDF) which explains hysteresis might explain this ... better.Z. [bugs:#450] Wrong notation for PEF upper threshold based statesStatus: open
Group: version-1.8.18
Created: Fri Jul 08, 2016 11:26 AM UTC by Yogindar
Last Updated: Fri Jul 08, 2016 11:26 AM UTC
Owner: nobodyFound the following log in one of the server with ipmitool11 | active | 0x11 | Temperature | Any | Critical | Threshold |
(0x01/0x0204),<LC,<UC | Alert | 1As per the log Lower non critical - going low and upper critical going high states are configured.
As per the codepef_b2s_gentype_1 = {
BIT_DESC_MAP_LIST,
{ {"<LNC", 0},="" ="" '<'="" :="" getting="" worse="" ="" {"="">LNC", 1}, / '>' : getting better /
{"<lc", 2},="" {"="">LC", 3},
{"<lnr", 4},="" {"="">LNR", 5},
{">UNC", 6},
{"<unc", 7},="" {"="">UC", 8},
{"<uc", 9},="" {"="">UNR", 10},
{"<UNR", 11},
{NULL}
} };The bit 6 onwards the representation is wrong?it should be
pef_b2s_gentype_1 = {
BIT_DESC_MAP_LIST,
{ {"<LNC", 0},="" ="" '<'="" :="" getting="" worse="" ="" {"="">LNC", 1}, / '>' : getting better /
{"<lc", 2},="" {"="">LC", 3},
{"<lnr", 4},="" {"="">LNR", 5},
{"<unc", 6},="" {"="">UNC", 7},
{"<uc", 8},="" {"="">UC", 9},
{"<unr", 10},="" {"="">UNR", 11},
{NULL}
} };Upper critical going high action is configured >UC denotes better than <UC.Sent from sourceforge.net because you indicated interest in https://sourceforge.net/p/ipmitool/bugs/450/To unsubscribe from further messages, please visit https://sourceforge.net/auth/subscriptions/</unr",></uc",></unc",></lnr",></lc",></uc",></unc",></lnr",></lc",>

[Zdenek Styblik]

IPMI specification I've mentioned. It doesn't seem to be documented in man page.

[Yogindar]

Zdenek, Thanks. The state part we are aware of. But the representation of ipmitool and relation wasn't clear. It could be better if man page is updated with the same.  Regards, Yogindar

On Thursday, July 14, 2016 10:14 PM, Zdenek Styblik <stybla@users.sf.net> wrote:

IPMI specification I've mentioned. It doesn't seem to be documented in man page. [bugs:#450] Wrong notation for PEF upper threshold based statesStatus: open
Group: version-1.8.18
Created: Fri Jul 08, 2016 11:26 AM UTC by Yogindar
Last Updated: Fri Jul 08, 2016 05:57 PM UTC
Owner: nobodyFound the following log in one of the server with ipmitool11 | active | 0x11 | Temperature | Any | Critical | Threshold |
(0x01/0x0204),<LC,<UC | Alert | 1As per the log Lower non critical - going low and upper critical going high states are configured.
As per the codepef_b2s_gentype_1 = {
BIT_DESC_MAP_LIST,
{ {"<LNC", 0},="" ="" '<'="" :="" getting="" worse="" ="" {"="">LNC", 1}, / '>' : getting better /
{"<lc", 2},="" {"="">LC", 3},
{"<lnr", 4},="" {"="">LNR", 5},
{">UNC", 6},
{"<unc", 7},="" {"="">UC", 8},
{"<uc", 9},="" {"="">UNR", 10},
{"<UNR", 11},
{NULL}
} };The bit 6 onwards the representation is wrong?it should be
pef_b2s_gentype_1 = {
BIT_DESC_MAP_LIST,
{ {"<LNC", 0},="" ="" '<'="" :="" getting="" worse="" ="" {"="">LNC", 1}, / '>' : getting better /
{"<lc", 2},="" {"="">LC", 3},
{"<lnr", 4},="" {"="">LNR", 5},
{"<unc", 6},="" {"="">UNC", 7},
{"<uc", 8},="" {"="">UC", 9},
{"<unr", 10},="" {"="">UNR", 11},
{NULL}
} };Upper critical going high action is configured >UC denotes better than <UC.Sent from sourceforge.net because you indicated interest in https://sourceforge.net/p/ipmitool/bugs/450/To unsubscribe from further messages, please visit https://sourceforge.net/auth/subscriptions/</unr",></uc",></unc",></lnr",></lc",></uc",></unc",></lnr",></lc",>