Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 17:01:58 -0400 From: John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> To: "Constantine A. Murenin" <mureninc@gmail.com> Cc: Scott Long <scottl@samsco.org>, src-committers@FreeBSD.org, Alexander Leidinger <netchild@FreeBSD.org>, cvs-src@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, "Constantine A. Murenin" <cnst@FreeBSD.org>, Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>, Wilko Bulte <wb@freebie.xs4all.nl> Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/etc Makefile sensorsd.conf src/etc/defaults rc.conf src/etc/rc.d Makefile sensorsd src/lib/libc/gen sysctl.3 src/sbin/sysctl sysctl.8 sysctl.c src/share/man/man5 rc.conf.5 src/share/man/man9 Makefile sensor_attach.9 src/sys/conf f Message-ID: <200710161702.00008.jhb@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <f34ca13c0710151957r75039ad9g5267f54cc15b5fe5@mail.gmail.com> References: <f34ca13c0710151957r75039ad9g5267f54cc15b5fe5@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Monday 15 October 2007 10:57:48 pm Constantine A. Murenin wrote: > On 15/10/2007, John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> wrote: > > On Monday 15 October 2007 09:43:21 am Alexander Leidinger wrote: > > > Quoting Scott Long <scottl@samsco.org> (from Mon, 15 Oct 2007 > > 01:47:59 -0600): > > > > > > > Alexander Leidinger wrote: > > > >> Quoting Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> (from Sun, 14 Oct > > > >> 2007 17:54:21 +0000): > > > > > > >>> listen to the various mumblings about putting RAID-controller status > > > >>> under sensors framework. > > > >> > > > >> What's wrong with this? Currently each RAID driver has to come up > > > >> with his own way of displaying the RAID status. It's like saying > > > >> that each network driver has to implement/display the stuff you can > > > >> see with ifconfig in its own way, instead of using the proper > > > >> network driver interface for this. > > > >> > > > > > > > > For the love of God, please don't use RAID as an example to support your > > > > argument for the sensord framework. Representing RAID state is several > > > > orders of magnitude more involved than representing network state. > > > > There are also landmines in the OpenBSD bits of RAID support that are > > > > best left out of FreeBSD, unless you like alienating vendors and risking > > > > legal action. Leave it alone. Please. I don't care what you do with > > > > lmsensors or cpu power settings or whatever. Leave RAID out of it. > > > > > > Talking about RAID status is not talking about alienating vendors. I > > > don't talk about alienating vendors and I don't intent to do. You may > > > not be able to display a full blown RAID status with the sensors > > > framework, but it allows for a generic "wors/works not" or > > > "OK/degraded" status display in drivers we have the source for. This > > > is enough for status monitoring (e.g., nagios). > > > > As I mentioned in the thread on arch@ where people brought up objections that > > were apparently completely ignored, this is far from useful for RAID > > monitoring. For example, if my RAID is down, which disk do I need to > > replace? Again, all this was covered earlier and (apparently) ignored. > > Also, what strikes me as odd is that I didn't see this patch posted again for > > review this time around before it was committed. > > This has been addressed back in July. You'd use bioctl to see which > exact disc needs to be replaced. Sensorsd is intended for an initial > alert about something being wrong. In July you actually said you weren't sure about bioctl(8). :) But also, this model really isn't very sufficient since it doesn't handle things like drives going away, etc. You really need to maintain a decent amount of state to keep all that, and this is far easier done in userland rather than in the kernel. However, you can choose to ignore real-world experience if you choose. Basically, by having so little data in hw.sensors if I had to write a RAID monitoring daemon I would just not use hw.sensors since it's easier for me to figure out the simple status myself based on the other state I already have to track (unless you write an event-driven daemon based on messages posted by the firmware in which case again you wouldn't use hw.sensors for that either). -- John Baldwin
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200710161702.00008.jhb>