No subject

Brad Bishop bradleyb at
Wed Sep 5 06:46:47 AEST 2018

> On Aug 28, 2018, at 7:26 PM, Bills, Jason M <jason.m.bills at> wrote:
> Here is a link to the issue:
> The main things that started this proof-of-concept are that we have requirements to be fully IPMI compliant and to support 4000+ SEL entries.  Our attempts to scale the D-Bus logs to that level were not successful, so we started considering directly accessing journald as an alternative.
> So far, I've been focused only on IPMI SEL, so I hadn't considered extending the change to non-IPMI error logs; however, these IPMI SEL entries should still fit in well as a subset of all other error logs which could also be moved to the journal.
> My goal is to align with the OpenBMC design and keep anything IPMI-related isolated only to things that care about IPMI.  

But it seems like you are proposing that every application that wants to make
a log needs to have the logic to translate its internal data model to IPMI speak,
so it can make a journal call with all the IPMI metadata populated.  Am I
understanding correctly?  That doesn’t seem aligned with keeping IPMI isolated.

A concrete example - phosphor-hwmon.  How do you intend to figure out something
like IPMI_SEL_SENSOR_PATH in the phosphor-hwmon application?  Actually it would
help quite a bit to understand how each of the fields in your sample below would
be determined by an arbitrary dbus application (like phosphor-hwmon).

Further, if you expand this approach to further log formats other than SEL,
won’t the applications become a mess of translation logic from the applications
data mode <-> log format in use?

> My thinking was that the metadata is a bit like background info, so it is a good place to hide data that only matters to the minority, such as the IPMI-specific data.  With this, the IPMI SEL logs can be included among all the existing error logs but still have the metadata for additional IPMI stuff that doesn't matter for anyone else.
> So, for writing logs:
> A. non-IPMI error logs can be written as normal
> B. IPMI SEL entries are written with the IPMI-specific metadata populated
> For reading logs:
> A. non-IPMI readers see IPMI SEL entries as normal text logs
> B. IPMI readers dump just the IPMI SEL entries and get the associated IPMI-specific info from the metadata

I’d rather have a single approach that works for everyone; although, I’m
not sure how that would look.

> Thanks,
> -Jason

This is called top posting, please try to avoid when using the mail-list.
It makes threaded conversation hard to follow and respond to.  thx.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Brad Bishop <bradleyb at> 
> Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2018 10:59 AM
> To: Bills, Jason M <jason.m.bills at>
> Cc: openbmc at
> Subject: Re: 
>> On Aug 28, 2018, at 1:34 PM, Bills, Jason M <jason.m.bills at> wrote:
>> I just added a comment to a github discussion about the IPMI SEL and thought I should share it here as well:
> Can you send a link to the issue?
>> I have been working on a proof-of-concept to move the IPMI SEL entries out of D-Bus into journald instead.
>> Since journald allows custom metadata for log entries, I've thought of having the SEL message logged to the journal and using metadata to store the necessary IPMI info associated with the entry. Here is an example of logging a type 0x02 system event entry to journald:
>> sd_journal_send("MESSAGE=%s", message.c_str(),
>>                           "PRIORITY=%i", selPriority,
>>                           "MESSAGE_ID=%s", selMessageId,
>>                           "IPMI_SEL_RECORD_ID=%d", recordId,
>>                           "IPMI_SEL_RECORD_TYPE=%x", selSystemType,
>>                           "IPMI_SEL_GENERATOR_ID=%x", genId,
>>                           "IPMI_SEL_SENSOR_PATH=%s", path.c_str(),
>>                           "IPMI_SEL_EVENT_DIR=%x", assert,
>>                           "IPMI_SEL_DATA=%s", selDataStr,
>>                           NULL);
>> Using journald should allow for scaling to more SEL entries which should also enable us to support more generic IPMI behavior such as the Add SEL command.
> A design point of OpenBMC from day one was to not design it around IPMI.
> At a glance this feels counter to that goal.
> I’m not immediately opposed to moving our error logs out of DBus, but can you provide an extendible abstraction?  Not everyone uses SEL, or IPMI even.  At a minimum please drop the letters ‘ipmi’ and ‘sel’ :-) from the base design, and save those for something that translates to IPMI-speak.
> As some background, our systems tend towards fewer ‘error logs’ with much more data per log (4-16k), and yes I admit the current design is biased towards that and does not scale when we approach 1000s of small SEL entries.
> thx - brad
>> -Jason

More information about the openbmc mailing list