openlmi-devel September 2013

openlmi-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org

15 participants
76 discussions

[RFC] New provider registration process
by Tomáš Smetana 23 Oct '13

23 Oct '13

Hello, I'm now trying to figure out how to improve the provider registration process to make things at least look less fragile from the user's perspective. We're still facing problems with the providers and CIMOMs installation: the openlmi-* provider packages depend on a virtual require (cim-server) and it's beyond our control which package is installed by yum to satisfy the dependency (sblim-sfcb currently IIRC). If this is not what the user wants or the user decides to switch the CIMOM, install another one etc., then the providers have to be re-registered again manually which is not an easy task since the order of the mofs/regs is not saved anywhere and each CIMOM (and even CIMOMs version) requires special procedure. My plan is to store the registrations in a special CIMOM-independent database which would enable the user to re-do the registrations at any time. Most notably we should be able to re-register whatever provider is installed on the system from the CIMOMs package post-install scriptlets. The new script should offer three actions: register, unregister and reregister. Registration and unregistration will require the same arguments as the current script. I'm pretty sure there are many details and combinations that can't be handled reasonably well. However here's some idea dump on how I suppose things might work: ============================================================================= Registration The user specifies one or more MOF files zero or one REG file. Optionally will request the CIMOM to register for, namespace and version of the provider for the REG file. If the CIMOM was not explicitly requested register for all the known CIMOMs in the database and for all the CIMOMs installed/found. Registration should handle the update transparently. The files, version string, CIMOM and namespace form the "registration object" which is what we need to be able to re-assemble during re-registration. 1 if (none of the MOFs/REG in the database yet) { 2 registration = create new registration (id + timestamp) 3 } else if (the known MOFs/REG belong to the same registration) { 4 registration = the one the MOFs/REG belong to 5 if (requested CIMOMs != CIMOMs of the existing registration) 6 exit with error: upgrade must be valid for all the previous 7 registrations 8 } else { 9 exit with error: only one registration can be replaced 10 } 11 unregister the previous registration from CIMOM(s) 12 if (error) { 13 exit 14 } 15 remove the old files backups 16 copy the new MOFs/REG to the backup location 17 update/insert database records (don't overwrite existing registration timestamps) ============================================================================= Unregistration Nothing fancy happens here: We only have to be careful to keep the registration data consistent and allow to unregister the same and complete set of classes that has been registered previously. 1 for every selected CIMOM: 2 if (MOFs/REG not in the same registration || unknown) { 3 exit with error 4 unregister in the CIMOM 5 } 6 delete the database records (MOFs/REG, registration) 7 delete the backup files ============================================================================= Re-registration: Should be simple: just reconstruct the command line from the database. The ordering of the registration is determined by the timestamp of their initial registration (updates don't change the timestamp). 1 for every selected CIMOM { 2 get MOFs/REG/namespaces/version in the reverse timestamp order 3 re-run the CIMOM registration (using backup MOF/REG files) 4 } I'm not quite sure how clear I made myself with the ideas and I assume many problems get spotted in the real world testing. However if you have some ideas or corrections... I'm all ear. Thanks and regards, -- Tomáš Smetana Platform Engineering, Red Hat

3 4

ANNOUNCE: KonkretCMPI 0.9.0 released
by Radek Novacek 15 Oct '13

15 Oct '13

Disclaimer: I know this is OpenLMI mailing list, but I will post announcements about new versions of KonkretCMPI here, because many of OpenLMI providers use it. Since KonkretCMPI upstream [1] is dead for long time (last upstream version 0.8.7 was released 2008-10-22) I've decided to continue development myself. I don't have access to original SCM repository or web page, so I've created git repo at github [2]. Highlights of version 0.9.0: * Use CMake as buildsystem (added FindCMPI.cmake and FindKonkretCMPI.cmake modules) * Python bindings for the MOF parser * Fixed using experimental schema * Assertion crash fixed * Add missing headers * Many other minor bugs fixed You can download the new version from github [3]. It is already in Fedora rawhide and it's coming to Fedora 18 soon. Radek Novacek [1] http://konkretcmpi.org/ [2] https://github.com/rnovacek/konkretcmpi [3] https://github.com/rnovacek/konkretcmpi/archive/0.9.0/konkretcmpi-0.9.0.tar…

2 1

Clarification Required in Implementing Nfs Share
by Chethan Y 01 Oct '13

01 Oct '13

Hi, Please Correct me if i am wrong and let me know if there are any suggestions or help. We Are Implementing Nfs Protocol for NAS Head profile. As per my understanding CIM_ManagedElement (Super Class) | CIM_ManagedSystemElement (Sub Class) | CIM_LogicalElement | CIM_EnabledLogicalElement | | [ CIM_Share ] CIM_Process | | [ CIM_FileShare ] CIM_UnixProcess | [ CIM_NfsShare ] Instances of CIM_Process are running but CIM_Share is not supported. So, We need to enable and implement CIM_Share and later on we are going to add Nfs protocol for CIM_Nfsshare and CIFS protocol for CIM_CIFSshare. CIM_EnabledLogicalElement is inherited in LMI_Storage-Base.mof Where Could i find the CIM_Share file and i am confused in which file should i start the implementation ? . And also how to create a new cim class and register it? Speedy reply would be really appreciated .

3 3

openlmi-reviews Digest, Vol 5, Issue 25
by openlmi-reviews-request＠lists.fedorahosted.org 30 Sep '13

30 Sep '13

Send openlmi-reviews mailing list submissions to openlmi-reviews(a)lists.fedorahosted.org To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/openlmi-reviews or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to openlmi-reviews-request(a)lists.fedorahosted.org You can reach the person managing the list at openlmi-reviews-owner(a)lists.fedorahosted.org When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of openlmi-reviews digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Re: Review Request 896: openlmi-software: Make Software MOF file parseable by openlmi-doc-class2rst (Michal Minar) 2. Re: Review Request 893: lmishell, quicker associators' traversal (Michal Minar) 3. Re: Review Request 893: lmishell, quicker associators' traversal (Peter Hatina) 4. Re: Review Request 893: lmishell, quicker associators' traversal (Peter Hatina) 5. Re: Review Request 894: lmishell, introduce get_namespace() (Michal Minar) 6. Re: Review Request 895: lmishell, fix missing return value from LMIInstance.delete() (Michal Minar) 7. Re: Review Request 893: lmishell, quicker associators' traversal (Peter Hatina) 8. Re: Review Request 893: lmishell, quicker associators' traversal (Peter Hatina) 9. Re: Review Request 893: lmishell, quicker associators' traversal (Michal Minar) 10. Re: Review Request 893: lmishell, quicker associators' traversal (Peter Hatina) 11. Re: Review Request 894: lmishell, introduce get_namespace() (Peter Hatina) 12. Re: Review Request 894: lmishell, introduce get_namespace() (Peter Hatina) 13. Re: Review Request 896: openlmi-software: Make Storage MOF file parseable by openlmi-doc-class2rst (Jan Safranek) 14. Re: Review Request 896: openlmi-software: Make Software MOF file parseable by openlmi-doc-class2rst (Jan Safranek) 15. Re: Review Request 894: lmishell, introduce get_namespace() (Michal Minar) 16. Re: Review Request 896: openlmi-software: Make Software MOF file parseable by openlmi-doc-class2rst (Michal Minar) 17. Re: Review Request 894: lmishell, introduce get_namespace() (Peter Hatina) 18. Re: Review Request 895: lmishell, fix missing return value from LMIInstance.delete() (Peter Hatina) 19. Re: Review Request 896: openlmi-software: Make Software MOF file parseable by openlmi-doc-class2rst (Jan Safranek) 20. buildbot failure in OpenLMI on networking-rhel7 (openlmiproject(a)gmail.com) 21. Review Request 897: [1/1] Account: Add DeleteGroup method to be consistent with user's deletion (Roman Rakus) 22. Review Request 898: openlmi-networking [1/1] Implementation of route deletion (Radek Novacek) 23. Re: Review Request 898: openlmi-networking [1/1] Implementation of route deletion (Roman Rakus) 24. Re: Review Request 898: openlmi-networking [1/1] Implementation of route deletion (Radek Novacek) 25. buildbot failure in OpenLMI on networking-rhel7 (openlmiproject(a)gmail.com) 26. buildbot failure in OpenLMI on networking-rawhide (openlmiproject(a)gmail.com) 27. Re: Review Request 897: [1/1] Account: Add DeleteGroup method to be consistent with user's deletion (Radek Novacek) _______________________________________________ openlmi-reviews mailing list openlmi-reviews(a)lists.fedorahosted.org https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/openlmi-reviews

1 0

openlmi-reviews Digest, Vol 5, Issue 24
by openlmi-reviews-request＠lists.fedorahosted.org 28 Sep '13

28 Sep '13

1 0

openlmi-reviews Digest, Vol 5, Issue 23
by openlmi-reviews-request＠lists.fedorahosted.org 27 Sep '13

27 Sep '13

1 0

openlmi-reviews Digest, Vol 5, Issue 22
by openlmi-reviews-request＠lists.fedorahosted.org 26 Sep '13

26 Sep '13

Send openlmi-reviews mailing list submissions to openlmi-reviews(a)lists.fedorahosted.org To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/openlmi-reviews or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to openlmi-reviews-request(a)lists.fedorahosted.org You can reach the person managing the list at openlmi-reviews-owner(a)lists.fedorahosted.org When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of openlmi-reviews digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Re: Review Request 849: Hardware: Move PCI bus initialization to the Initialize() function (Michal Minar) 2. Re: Review Request 849: Hardware: Move PCI bus initialization to the Initialize() function (Peter Schiffer) 3. Re: Review Request 839: Hardware: Added PCI_Bridge provider (Peter Schiffer) 4. Re: Review Request 839: Hardware: Added PCI_Bridge provider (Peter Schiffer) 5. Review Request 885: python-base [1/1] python: support for older versions of python (2.6) (Michal Minar) 6. Review Request 886: storage [1/1] adjustments for changes in cmpi_logging base module (Michal Minar) 7. Re: Review Request 886: storage [1/1] adjustments for changes in cmpi_logging base module (Jan Safranek) 8. Re: Review Request 885: python-base [1/1] python: support for older versions of python (2.6) (Jan Safranek) 9. Re: Review Request 885: python-base [1/1] python: support for older versions of python (2.6) (Jan Safranek) 10. Re: Review Request 885: python-base [1/1] python: support for older versions of python (2.6) (Michal Minar) 11. Re: Review Request 885: storage [1/1] python: support for older versions of python (2.6) (Michal Minar) 12. Re: Review Request 885: storage [1/1] python: support for older versions of python (2.6) (Michal Minar) 13. Re: Review Request 886: storage [1/1] adjustments for changes in cmpi_logging base module (Michal Minar) 14. Review Request 887: openlmi-providers [1/2] fan: add FindLMSensors.cmake for finding lm_sensors (Radek Novacek) 15. Review Request 888: openlmi-providers [2/2] cmake: search for openlmi-mof-register in the /usr/local dir (Radek Novacek) 16. Review Request 889: openlmi-networking [1/3] cmake: Add install prefix to cmake search path (Radek Novacek) 17. Review Request 890: openlmi-networking [2/3] Specify dependencies more precisely in README (Radek Novacek) 18. Review Request 891: openlmi-networking [3/3] Use the new lmi_init function for provider initialization (Radek Novacek) 19. Re: Review Request 887: openlmi-providers [1/2] fan: add FindLMSensors.cmake for finding lm_sensors (Jan Safranek) 20. Re: Review Request 888: openlmi-providers [2/2] cmake: search for openlmi-mof-register in the /usr/local dir (Jan Safranek) 21. Re: Review Request 889: openlmi-networking [1/3] cmake: Add install prefix to cmake search path (Jan Safranek) 22. Re: Review Request 890: openlmi-networking [2/3] Specify dependencies more precisely in README (Jan Safranek) 23. Re: Review Request 891: openlmi-networking [3/3] Use the new lmi_init function for provider initialization (Jan Safranek) 24. Re: Review Request 887: openlmi-providers [1/2] fan: add FindLMSensors.cmake for finding lm_sensors (Radek Novacek) 25. Re: Review Request 888: openlmi-providers [2/2] cmake: search for openlmi-mof-register in the /usr/local dir (Radek Novacek) 26. Re: Review Request 889: openlmi-networking [1/3] cmake: Add install prefix to cmake search path (Radek Novacek) 27. Re: Review Request 890: openlmi-networking [2/3] Specify dependencies more precisely in README (Radek Novacek) 28. Re: Review Request 891: openlmi-networking [3/3] Use the new lmi_init function for provider initialization (Radek Novacek) _______________________________________________ openlmi-reviews mailing list openlmi-reviews(a)lists.fedorahosted.org https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/openlmi-reviews

1 0

query regarding Nas head profile.
by sunil kumar 26 Sep '13

26 Sep '13

Hi, Is Nas Network Ports profile already implemented? if yes. we are running nfs server process, but couldn't find nfs server process instance in CIM_ProtocolEndPoint, CIM_NetworkPort. we are getting confusion in development of NAS Head. Before we develop a Nas Head we need to implement an association between LMI_ProtocolEndpoint provider and LMI_NetworkPortprovider, Is this already defined. Whether we need to continue the development of openlmi-network in c or python. we have all .c source code in git source. whether python scripts are their in openlmi-networking also, if their. where is it present? we have different teams of development of networking and storage. how do we start proceeding?

2 1

implementation of nfs head
by sunil kumar 25 Sep '13

25 Sep '13

hi We are in implementation of nas head. need to know whether we are following the correct procedure of developing. In the 60_LMI_Networking.mof file at the end we created the following association as told in smis profile.. /******************************* * NAS Network PORTS Profile * *******************************/ [ Association, Provider("cmpi:cmpiLMI_Networking"), Version("0.1.0"), Description("An association between a portocolendpoint and networkport.") ] class LMI_ProtocolDeviceSAPImplementation: CIM_DeviceSAPImplementation { [ Key, Override("Antecedent"), Description("The instance of CIM_ProtocolEndpoint subclass " "representing network device.") ] CIM_NetworkPort REF Antecedent; [ Key, Override("Dependent"), Description("The instance of LMI_NetworkPort that represent " "same device as Antecedent.") ] CIM_ProtocolEndpoint REF Dependent; }; [ Provider("cmpi:cmpiLMI_Networking"), Version("0.1.0"), Description("End point protocol") ] we again complied and registered the mof file.. we got the new CMI_DeviseSAPImplemntaiton in src and in local/yawn.. now if this is procedure is correct we ll write the method in it.. We also have python script and cmpi in c. bit confuse .. if any other procedure to followed let us know. we ll follow that..

2 2

openlmi-reviews Digest, Vol 5, Issue 21
by openlmi-reviews-request＠lists.fedorahosted.org 25 Sep '13

25 Sep '13

1 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

openlmi-devel September 2013