-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 144
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Add system.management-interface
hardware property
#3459
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
@pcahyna howdy, can you please look at this? Once we agree on the naming, we will add support for mrack in this PR. |
Users wanting to select a system with available system management interface can use this field. Being added to be able to select Beaker machines with `IPMI`. Signed-off-by: Miroslav Vadkerti <[email protected]>
@@ -20,6 +20,9 @@ description: | | |||
# Integer or string, required number of NUMA nodes. | |||
numa-nodes: 2|">= 2" | |||
|
|||
# System management interface |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Should be String, system management interface.
@@ -20,6 +20,9 @@ description: | | |||
# Integer or string, required number of NUMA nodes. | |||
numa-nodes: 2|">= 2" | |||
|
|||
# System management interface | |||
management-interface: IPMI | |||
|
|||
.. versionchanged:: 1.39 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Add also versionchanged
block for the new constraint:
.. versionchanged:: 1.33
Added ``location.lab-controller`` into specification.
system.management-interface
hardware property
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The naming sounds reasonable. The possible values should be probably defined as well, once we have a tangible list. I've quickly checked those brainstormed values and for example Lenovo XClarity
is described as Lenovo's implementation of IPMI
so there might be some clarifications needed.
I don't understand some entries in the suggested list.
iDRAC etc. is not a management interface, it is the management platform on DELL servers, i.e. the hardware:
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dell_DRAC) It also implements an IPMI interface, in addition to web etc., which is what one would generally be interested in when requesting a machine with a management interface, so one would ask for it by requesting Other questions:
at least the
I suppose at least
again, idVendor and idProduct may be interesting to expose. Output for iDRAC:
I am not asking to have the additional attributes available now, just to think how they could be added to the syntax - I don't see how they would fit into the proposed syntax, maybe something like
instead? dunno.
|
I believe this will be supported: hardware:
and:
- system:
management-interface: IPMI_v1
- system:
management-interface: IPMI_v1
tmt already supports system:
management-interface:
# Now what is `IPMI`? How should we call it, a protocol, implementation? `protocol` was suggested below:
protocol: IPMI
# Now we can support more fields here, not mixing IPMI with them:
vendor-name: "~ MontaVista Software, Inc."
# A machine with both IPMI and Redfish?
and:
- system:
management-interface:
protocol: IPMI
- system:
management-interface:
protocol: Redfish
vendor: 0x04b3 And, in the future, more keys can start appearing here if necessary.
I agree, and I like
Eeee, I do :) I believe tmt is case-insensitive in this area, or better should be, it should give you an Intel CPU with |
Users wanting to select a system with available system management interface can use this field.
Being added to be able to select Beaker machines with
IPMI
.Seems there are other management interfaces which could have in the future, like:
Pull Request Checklist