PSU Sensors - Associations

[Patrick Venture]

On Wed, Oct 23, 2019 at 10:54 AM James Feist
<james.feist at linux.intel.com> wrote:
>
> On 10/23/19 10:52 AM, Patrick Venture wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 23, 2019 at 10:50 AM James Feist
> > <james.feist at linux.intel.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> On 10/23/19 10:37 AM, Patrick Venture wrote:
> >>> So, I flipped the association interface addition and the property
> >>> initialization to match other sensors, and then it started working.  I
> >>> was curious if you had any suggestions on how to find the matching
> >>> sensor given the paths, for instance:
> >>>
> >>> busctl get-property xyz.openbmc_project.PSUSensor
> >>> /xyz/openbmc_project/sensors/temperature/alt2_Temperature
> >>> xyz.openbmc_project.Association.Definitions Associations
> >>> a(sss) 1 "chassis" "all_sensors"
> >>> "/xyz/openbmc_project/inventory/system/board/Altie"
> >>>
> >>> busctl tree --no-pager xyz.openbmc_project.EntityManager|grep Altie
> >>>             |-/xyz/openbmc_project/inventory/system/board/Altie
> >>>             | |-/xyz/openbmc_project/inventory/system/board/Altie/al_temp_0
> >>>             | |-/xyz/openbmc_project/inventory/system/board/Altie/al_temp_1
> >>>             | |-/xyz/openbmc_project/inventory/system/board/Altie/al_temp_2
> >>>             | `-/xyz/openbmc_project/inventory/system/board/Altie/alt1
> >>>
> >>> No alt2 -- so how do I know this?  I can walk every subordinate object
> >>> to find the name match, but I was curious if you had a faster idea?
> >>
> >> So for the associations you should generally not look at the definition,
> >> the definition is primarily for the mapper. You should be looking in the
> >> mapper for the association that matches the sensor name that you care
> >> about and it should point back to the configuration. If there are not
> >> associations for each of the sub-sensors, there should be.

I took a look at the ObjectMapper interface you mentioned, and it just
points to the Board, not the individual sensor from the board.

> >
> > I must have looked at the wrong entry there because I didn't see
> > anything pointing back to the sensor config entry, but just the sensor
> > itself.  I'll take a look now, the PSU sensor naming issue is
> > identical to the one if there is just another name available or the
> > Pwm case.
>
> Ah you're right, I don't that that is implemented. Should we create a
> new association for this? It seems useful.

Not that I don't love hearing that I'm right, but in this case I would
have rather been wrong and there been a magic bullet in place that I
had overlooked.

I think all of my association mapping woes would immediately go away
if every sensor pointed to the configuration dbus object that brought
it to life.

>
> >>
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>> Patrick
> >>>