Unfortunately the behaviour seems to be same as before. Also I found out that this also happens when I just set ignore_non_interpretable_sensors to 0, regardless of the discrete_reading. Here are the debug logs again: https://privatebin.florianstroeger.com/?a6ca58fafa858533#UnYEGT64uxq1Pt5p//LVT2jxzga2sKGeUhURExSixkE= (Again, more than 6800 lines)
Florian On Wed, Dec 12, 2018 at 10:47 PM Albert Chu <ch...@llnl.gov> wrote: > Ahh, you didn't mention there was an error message :-) > > I think this is just a corner case in the example, where it should only > be calling a function if the bitmask type is known. I've updated the > example in the same branch. Could you give it a try? > > Al > > On Wed, 2018-12-12 at 20:41 +0100, Florian wrote: > > Hey, > > > > Yes, your recapitulation is correct. > > I've also done everything you said in your email again and added the > > both debug parameters. > > Here is the log: https://privatebin.florianstroeger.com/?fd665f9cdea8 > > a9c8#F8H5p5lmKmTqiUkMhfwSZgeKLjcyPfrMaXmCj6b0TTQ= > > (more than 6800 lines of output) > > > > Florian > > > > On Wed, Dec 12, 2018 at 8:12 PM Albert Chu <ch...@llnl.gov> wrote: > > > On Wed, 2018-12-12 at 12:27 +0100, Florian wrote: > > > > Sorry, I forgot. > > > > > > > > I finally get the readings: > > > > root@preisschild-server-2:~/ipmi# gcc -O2 -o ipmimonitoring- > > > sensors > > > > ipmimonitoring-sensors.c -lipmimonitoring && ./ipmimonitoring- > > > sensors > > > > Record ID, Sensor Name, Sensor Number, Sensor Type, Sensor State, > > > > Sensor Reading, Sensor Units, Sensor Event/Reading Type Code, > > > Sensor > > > > Event Bitmask, Sensor Event String > > > > 5, Power Meter, 5, Current, N/A, 174.00, W, 9h, 2h, 'Device > > > Enabled' > > > > > > Ok, good, that means it's working. > > > > > > > The only thing now is, I only get it when I set record_ids[] to > > > {5, > > > > 0} and record_ids_length = 1. > > > > If I set them to the default values (0 and 0), nothing shows, > > > unless > > > > I set ignore_non_interpretable_sensors to 1. > > > > > > Wait a second, so lets go back to the default example file that > > > comes > > > with FreeIPMI. > > > > > > This default example file shows most sensors, but not #5. And #8 & > > > #9 > > > don't have watt readings. Correct? > > > > > > If you set discrete_reading = 1, watt readings show up on #8 & #9, > > > but > > > sensor #5 still doesn't show up? That's what I would expect. > > > > > > If you then set ignore_non_interpretable_sensors = 0, then I would > > > expect record #5's sensor to show up w/ watt readings. But you're > > > saying at this point no sensors are output at all? > > > > > > Al > > > > > > > Florian > > > > > > > > On Wed, Dec 12, 2018 at 12:50 AM Albert Chu <ch...@llnl.gov> > > > wrote: > > > > > Just to double check, ignore_non_interpretable_sensors is set > > > to 0? > > > > > > > > > > Al > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, 2018-12-11 at 20:55 +0100, Florian wrote: > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > > > Sure, here's the log: https://privatebin.florianstroeger.com/ > > > ?77d > > > > > 4fd1 > > > > > > 8f282d55e#K0MG3NEiH0+sZvFNo+s8F9zvm1DYTj3f6kU8OEjvtmQ= > > > > > > > > > > > > Florian > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 7:29 PM Albert Chu <ch...@llnl.gov> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Hey Florian, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Good, so atleast the "discrete reading" workaround works > > > > > correctly > > > > > > > now. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > With IPM_MONITORING_FLAGS_DEBUG I did not get any more > > > logs, > > > > > so I > > > > > > > did > > > > > > > > it with IPMI_MONITORING_FLAGS_DEBUG_IPMI_PACKETS. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Could you set both of these with the or operator and re- > > > run, > > > > > i.e > > > > > > > > > > > > > > unsigned int ipmimonitoring_init_flags = > > > > > IPM_MONITORING_FLAGS_DEBUG > > > > > > > | > > > > > > > IPMI_MONITORING_FLAGS_DEBUG_IPMI_PACKETS > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > Al > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, 2018-12-11 at 08:52 +0100, Florian wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ---------- Forwarded message --------- > > > > > > > > From: Florian <florian.stroe...@gmail.com> > > > > > > > > Date: Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 8:52 AM > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: [Freeipmi-devel] ipmimonitoring-sensors.c > > > > > > > > discretereading workaround > > > > > > > > To: Albert Chu <ch...@llnl.gov> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hey Al, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for the fast patch, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We got at least a partial victory: > > > > > > > > After setting discrete_reading to 1, I got two of the PSU > > > > > sensors > > > > > > > > working: > > > > > > > > 8, Power Supply 1, 8, Power Supply, Nominal, 45.00, W, > > > 6Fh, > > > > > 1h, > > > > > > > > 'Presence detected' > > > > > > > > 9, Power Supply 2, 9, Power Supply, Nominal, 40.00, W, > > > 6Fh, > > > > > 1h, > > > > > > > > 'Presence detected' > > > > > > > > Unfortunately sensor 5 (total power meter) doesn't show > > > up. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > After setting record_ids[] to {5, 0} and > > > record_ids_length = > > > > > 1, > > > > > > > I > > > > > > > > only get the headers: > > > > > > > > Record ID, Sensor Name, Sensor Number, Sensor Type, > > > Sensor > > > > > State, > > > > > > > > Sensor Reading, Sensor Units, Sensor Event/Reading Type > > > Code, > > > > > > > Sensor > > > > > > > > Event Bitmask, Sensor Event String > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Before your patch it looked like this: > > > > > > > > Record ID, Sensor Name, Sensor Number, Sensor Type, > > > Sensor > > > > > State, > > > > > > > > Sensor Reading, Sensor Units, Sensor Event/Reading Type > > > Code, > > > > > > > Sensor > > > > > > > > Event Bitmask, Sensor Event String > > > > > > > > 5, Power Meter, 5, Current, N/A, N/A, N/A, 9h, 2h, > > > 'Device > > > > > > > Enabled'. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > With IPM_MONITORING_FLAGS_DEBUG I did not get any more > > > logs, > > > > > so I > > > > > > > did > > > > > > > > it with IPMI_MONITORING_FLAGS_DEBUG_IPMI_PACKETS. > > > > > > > > I've pasted the logs for that to my privatebin again: > > > https:/ > > > > > /pri > > > > > > > vate > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > bin.florianstroeger.com/?29b500374675145d#dqIOvHjjtK0FbooesKFeC5Ow2 > > > > > > > fl > > > > > > > > dIWSyuWIRiNnzW+0= > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Florian > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 1:13 AM Al Chu <ch...@llnl.gov> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hey Florian, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I have an experimental branch called ipmimonitoring- > > > > > discrete- > > > > > > > > > reading on > > > > > > > > > github here: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/chu11/freeipmi-mirror/tree/ipmimonit > > > orin > > > > > g-di > > > > > > > scre > > > > > > > > > te-r > > > > > > > > > eading > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ./autogen.sh > > > > > > > > > ./configure > > > > > > > > > make > > > > > > > > > make install > > > > > > > > > re-compile ipmimonitoring-sensors.c and try it out > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > LMK if you need help, like getting to the right > > > branch. If > > > > > you > > > > > > > > > can't > > > > > > > > > make install, LMK and I can show you some linker > > > tricks. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Al > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, 2018-12-05 at 20:34 +0100, Florian wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Hey Al, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That's awesome! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sure, I'm totally OK with a git repo. As long as I > > > just > > > > > need > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > do > > > > > > > > > > configure and make I can do it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for looking into this so fast! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Florian > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Dec 5, 2018 at 8:26 PM Albert Chu <chu11@llnl > > > .gov > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Hey Florian, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ok, I think I found a bug. The "discrete reading" > > > flag > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > passed > > > > > > > > > > > to an > > > > > > > > > > > underlying library correctly, but the result is not > > > > > stored > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > > libipmimonitoring correctly. I don't remember how > > > this > > > > > > > > > workaround > > > > > > > > > > > works 100%, because I never had this motherboard. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Once I look into this, how would like to be able to > > > > > test? > > > > > > > Will > > > > > > > > > > > pointing you to a github repo be ok? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > For my personal notes for later: see > > > > > > > > > > > _digital_sensor_reading() and > > > > > _specific_sensor_reading(), > > > > > > > store > > > > > > > > > > > sensor > > > > > > > > > > > reading result and possibly units and other things > > > too. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Al > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, 2018-12-05 at 10:59 +0100, Florian wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Hey Albert, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The changeing of record_ids and record_ids_length > > > > > showed > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > sensor 5 > > > > > > > > > > > > (but no data) like this > > > > > > > > > > > > Record ID, Sensor Name, Sensor Number, Sensor > > > Type, > > > > > > > Sensor > > > > > > > > > State, > > > > > > > > > > > > Sensor Reading, Sensor Units, Sensor > > > Event/Reading > > > > > Type > > > > > > > Code, > > > > > > > > > > > Sensor > > > > > > > > > > > > Event Bitmask, Sensor Event String > > > > > > > > > > > > 5, Power Meter, 5, Current, N/A, N/A, N/A, 9h, > > > 2h, > > > > > > > 'Device > > > > > > > > > > > Enabled'. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > IPMI_MONITORING_FLAGS_DEBUG unfortunately did not > > > add > > > > > ANY > > > > > > > > > more > > > > > > > > > > > logs > > > > > > > > > > > > at all, so I tried with > > > > > > > > > IPMI_MONITORING_FLAGS_DEBUG_IPMI_PACKETS > > > > > > > > > > > > which gave me more logs. > > > > > > > > > > > > Those are quite a lot of more lines, so I pasted > > > it > > > > > into > > > > > > > my > > > > > > > > > > > > privatebin: https://privatebin.florianstroeger.co > > > m/?5 > > > > > 8387 > > > > > > > 298f > > > > > > > > > 9b91 > > > > > > > > > > > 3c4# > > > > > > > > > > > > CkDCOMP5eFXOs6Whn+giWtidWNhMZGrkhc3tXYPaK9o= > > > > > > > > > > > > I also tried setting discrete_reading to 1 as the > > > > > sensor > > > > > > > 5 > > > > > > > > > was > > > > > > > > > > > > visible with record_ids, but that did output the > > > same > > > > > > > > > results. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Florian > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Dec 5, 2018 at 12:07 AM Albert Chu <chu11 > > > @lln > > > > > l.go > > > > > > > v> > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hey Florian, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lets try: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > unsigned int record_ids[] = {5, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 0}; > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > unsigned int record_ids_length = 1; > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > unsigned int ipmimonitoring_init_flags = > > > > > > > > > > > > > IPMI_MONITORING_FLAGS_DEBUG; > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Al > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, 2018-12-04 at 20:16 +0100, Florian > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Oops, I'm sorry, Android-Mail apparently > > > deleted > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > CC... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I compiled with ipmimonitoring_init_flags = 1 > > > now > > > > > and > > > > > > > got > > > > > > > > > > > debug > > > > > > > > > > > > > stuff > > > > > > > > > > > > > > this time. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The output is following... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (ipmi_monitoring_sensor_reading.c, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ipmi_monitoring_get_sensor_reading, 1061): > > > > > > > record_type > > > > > > > > > '0xC0' > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > supported > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (ipmi_monitoring_sensor_reading.c, > > > > > > > > > _get_sensor_bitmask_type, > > > > > > > > > > > > > 752): > > > > > > > > > > > > > > event_reading_type_code '0x70' bitmask is OEM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (ipmi_monitoring_sensor_reading.c, > > > > > > > > > _get_sensor_bitmask_type, > > > > > > > > > > > > > 752): > > > > > > > > > > > > > > event_reading_type_code '0x71' bitmask is OEM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (ipmi_monitoring_sensor_reading.c, > > > > > > > > > _get_sensor_bitmask_type, > > > > > > > > > > > > > 752): > > > > > > > > > > > > > > event_reading_type_code '0x71' bitmask is OEM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (ipmi_monitoring_sensor_reading.c, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ipmi_monitoring_get_sensor_reading, 1061): > > > > > > > record_type > > > > > > > > > '0x8' > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > supported > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (ipmi_monitoring_sensor_reading.c, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ipmi_monitoring_get_sensor_reading, 1061): > > > > > > > record_type > > > > > > > > > '0x8' > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > supported > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (ipmi_monitoring_sensor_reading.c, > > > > > > > _get_sensor_reading, > > > > > > > > > 356): > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ipmi_sensor_read: sensor reading unavailable > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (ipmi_monitoring_sensor_reading.c, > > > > > > > > > _threshold_sensor_reading, > > > > > > > > > > > > > 571): > > > > > > > > > > > > > > cannot read sensor for record id '23' > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (ipmi_monitoring_sensor_reading.c, > > > > > > > _get_sensor_reading, > > > > > > > > > 356): > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ipmi_sensor_read: sensor reading unavailable > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (ipmi_monitoring_sensor_reading.c, > > > > > > > > > _threshold_sensor_reading, > > > > > > > > > > > > > 571): > > > > > > > > > > > > > > cannot read sensor for record id '24' > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (ipmi_monitoring_sensor_reading.c, > > > > > > > _get_sensor_reading, > > > > > > > > > 356): > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ipmi_sensor_read: sensor reading unavailable > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (ipmi_monitoring_sensor_reading.c, > > > > > > > > > _threshold_sensor_reading, > > > > > > > > > > > > > 571): > > > > > > > > > > > > > > cannot read sensor for record id '38' > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (ipmi_monitoring_sensor_reading.c, > > > > > > > _get_sensor_reading, > > > > > > > > > 356): > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ipmi_sensor_read: sensor reading unavailable > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (ipmi_monitoring_sensor_reading.c, > > > > > > > > > _threshold_sensor_reading, > > > > > > > > > > > > > 571): > > > > > > > > > > > > > > cannot read sensor for record id '39' > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (ipmi_monitoring_sensor_reading.c, > > > > > > > _get_sensor_reading, > > > > > > > > > 356): > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ipmi_sensor_read: sensor reading unavailable > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (ipmi_monitoring_sensor_reading.c, > > > > > > > > > _threshold_sensor_reading, > > > > > > > > > > > > > 571): > > > > > > > > > > > > > > cannot read sensor for record id '40' > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (ipmi_monitoring_sensor_reading.c, > > > > > > > _get_sensor_reading, > > > > > > > > > 356): > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ipmi_sensor_read: sensor reading unavailable > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (ipmi_monitoring_sensor_reading.c, > > > > > > > > > _threshold_sensor_reading, > > > > > > > > > > > > > 571): > > > > > > > > > > > > > > cannot read sensor for record id '41' > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Record ID, Sensor Name, Sensor Number, Sensor > > > > > Type, > > > > > > > > > Sensor > > > > > > > > > > > State, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sensor Reading, Sensor Units, Sensor > > > > > Event/Reading > > > > > > > Type > > > > > > > > > Code, > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sensor > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Event Bitmask, Sensor Event String > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ipmi_monitoring_sensor_read_sensor_bitmask_strings: > > > > > > > > > success > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm unfortunately don't know much about C. > > > You > > > > > mean I > > > > > > > > > should > > > > > > > > > > > > > change > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in 'unsigned int record_ids[] = {0};' the 0 > > > to a > > > > > > > sensor- > > > > > > > > > id, > > > > > > > > > > > > > right? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Because I did this and that neither worked > > > with > > > > > > > putting 5 > > > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > power meter nor with any other sensor. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Florian > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Dec 4, 2018 at 7:47 PM Albert Chu > > > <chu11@ > > > > > llnl > > > > > > > .gov > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Didn't see your output, I guess you forgot > > > to > > > > > paste > > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > > in. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hmmmm. That means the main monitoring code > > > is > > > > > just > > > > > > > > > > > returning > > > > > > > > > > > > > "0", > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > i.e. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 0 sensors read. Could you try > > > experimenting > > > > > with > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > settings > > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > setting "record_ids" to the record we're > > > trying > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > figure > > > > > > > > > > > out > > > > > > > > > > > > > (i > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > think > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > it was #5 in your prior post). Lets just > > > > > > > concentrate > > > > > > > > > on > > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > specific > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > record and try to figure out what's going > > > on. > > > > > Also > > > > > > > set > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ipmimonitoring_init_flags for more > > > debugging > > > > > and > > > > > > > lets > > > > > > > > > see > > > > > > > > > > > what > > > > > > > > > > > > > gets > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > output. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > BTW, could you please respond to the > > > mailing > > > > > list. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Al > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, 2018-12-04 at 07:50 +0100, Florian > > > > > Ströger > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hello Albert, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for the fast reply! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I've set 'int > > > > > ignore_non_interpretable_sensors' > > > > > > > to 0, > > > > > > > > > but > > > > > > > > > > > > > when I > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > run > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the binary now it just outputs the > > > headers, > > > > > like > > > > > > > > > this: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Albert Chu > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ch...@llnl.gov > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Computer Scientist > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > High Performance Systems Division > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > > > > Albert Chu > > > > > > > > > > > > > ch...@llnl.gov > > > > > > > > > > > > > Computer Scientist > > > > > > > > > > > > > High Performance Systems Division > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > > Albert Chu > > > > > > > > > > > ch...@llnl.gov > > > > > > > > > > > Computer Scientist > > > > > > > > > > > High Performance Systems Division > > > > > > > > > > > Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > Florian Ströger > > > > > > > > Zur Rossschwemme 5 > > > > > > > > 3452 Atzenbrugg > > > > > > > > **************************** > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > > > > Freeipmi-devel mailing list > > > > > > > > Freeipmi-devel@gnu.org > > > > > > > > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/freeipmi-devel > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > Albert Chu > > > > > > > ch...@llnl.gov > > > > > > > Computer Scientist > > > > > > > High Performance Systems Division > > > > > > > Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > Albert Chu > > > > > ch...@llnl.gov > > > > > Computer Scientist > > > > > High Performance Systems Division > > > > > Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > Albert Chu > ch...@llnl.gov > Computer Scientist > High Performance Systems Division > Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory > >
_______________________________________________ Freeipmi-devel mailing list Freeipmi-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/freeipmi-devel