slotain
Minnow
It's bigger than a regular hat. It's funny.
Posts: 19 
|
Post by slotain on Nov 17, 2021 16:53:36 GMT
My Redfish service will be implemented from scratch, and I'm consuming the latest schema which includes the new ThermalSubsystem and not the recently deprecated Thermal. The redfishtool project does not work (smoothly) with this new schema, and it seems to require that the Thermal schema exist (for the best experience). For example, if I run a `redfishtool Chassis --help` command, I get `Thermal` as a subcommand. I realize it's up to me and my team to pick how much backward compatibility we'd like to support so that our customer's existing tools work with our new Redfish service. But, what we'd like to know is if the plan for the redfishtool is to adapt to the new schema changes in 2021.2 (ThermalSubsystem and PowerSubsystem) Is there a scheduled release for redfishtool to update and use the new schema?
Does the redfishtool work with ThermalSubsystem, today? And I'm somehow missing the feature that currently supports today's 2021.2 Redfish Schema? Is the redfishtool adaptable to any future schema changes?
|
|
|
|
Post by mraineri on Nov 18, 2021 13:55:54 GMT
Redfishtool currently does not work on the ThermalSubsystem resource. Unfortunately redfishtool has been de-prioritized for other projects (mainly our validation tools, Tacklebox, and protocol libraries). If someone were to make a contribution to add the support, we'd certainly welcome it.
I do have adding the ThermalSubsystem and PowerSubsystem on my list for support in Tacklebox, but I do not have an ETA on it at the moment; currently Tacklebox does have the same limitation in that it's looking for the Power and Thermal resources like redfishtool is.
In terms of what sorts of support for schemas we publish over time, usually from a client-tool perspective we focus more on what folks are used to seeing for command line tool support from other tools (like ipmitool) for general day-to-day operations, so we don't exhaustively cover every aspect of the model. For example, the fabric model has been part of Redfish for several years now, but we don't see a strong demand for a tool from the organization to manage fabrics; this has largely been left to infrastructure owners who want to integrate the management directly into their own management tools.
|
|
|
|
Post by mraineri on Nov 19, 2021 20:43:32 GMT
This post actually motivated me to go make the additions to Tacklebox ( github.com/DMTF/Redfish-Tacklebox) that I've been thinking about to support the new power and thermal models. As of version 1.1.8, the rf_sensor_list.py script will dynamically check for the presence of the new power and thermal models. If they're present, they will build a sensor list based on the new resources. If not, it will fall back on building sensor listings from the older models. |
|
|
|
Post by mani2409 on Sept 11, 2023 5:23:00 GMT
If I need to use deprecated Thermal, how can I do that?
|
|
|
|
Post by mraineri on Sept 11, 2023 12:47:41 GMT
In the context of Tacklebox, it will always go to the newer method if available. However, it will fall back on the older Thermal resource if ThermalSubsystem is not found. There's no control over this since it's designed to abstract the modeling detail from the caller.
However, if you're talking about other client tools, they're free to write software that uses the deprecated Thermal resource.
|
|
|
|
Post by mani2409 on Sept 20, 2023 15:54:08 GMT
now i am enable the new thermal subsytem.now i can see the sensor values in the sensor collection,but the values are not shown in the thermalsubsystem.is there any mistakes i have made?
|
|
|
|
Post by mraineri on Sept 20, 2023 17:15:57 GMT
It's hard to tell without knowing how your service is modeling the thermal subsystem. If you add "--debug" to the CLI for rf_sensor_list.py, I can look through the log file produced to see what's going on.
|
|
