Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

thermalctld no longer adds 'speed_tolerance' to the Redis database #395

Open
Yagami-Jiang opened this issue Aug 30, 2023 · 7 comments
Open

Comments

@Yagami-Jiang
Copy link

Hi, i want to know why we should delete 'speed_tolerance' field?
Cause as i know, the command 'show system-health summary' will call the file 'hardware_checker.py' which is at master branch, and it will get the 'speed_tolerance' from Redis database.
If we delete the 'speed_tolerance', an error will be generated when using the command 'show system-health summary'

image

root@sonic:/home/admin# show system-health summary

System status summary



System status LED  amber

Services:

Status: OK

Hardware:

Status: Not OK

Reasons: Failed to get speed tolerance for Fantray7_2

	 Failed to get speed tolerance for Fantray7_1

	 Failed to get speed tolerance for Fantray6_2

	 Failed to get speed tolerance for Fantray6_1

	 Failed to get speed tolerance for Fantray5_2

	 Failed to get speed tolerance for Fantray5_1

	 Failed to get speed tolerance for Fantray4_2

	 Failed to get speed tolerance for Fantray4_1

	 Failed to get speed tolerance for Fantray3_2

	 Failed to get speed tolerance for Fantray3_1

	 Failed to get speed tolerance for Fantray2_2

	 Failed to get speed tolerance for Fantray2_1

	 Failed to get speed tolerance for Fantray1_2

	 Failed to get speed tolerance for Fantray1_1

root@sonic:/home/admin# show platform fan

  Drawer    LED         FAN    Speed    Direction    Presence    Status          Timestamp

--------  -----  ----------  -------  -----------  ----------  --------  -----------------

Fantray1  green  Fantray1_1      56%       INTAKE     Present        OK  20221222 15:29:07

Fantray1  green  Fantray1_2      56%       INTAKE     Present        OK  20221222 15:29:07

Fantray2  green  Fantray2_1      55%       INTAKE     Present        OK  20221222 15:29:07

Fantray2  green  Fantray2_2      56%       INTAKE     Present        OK  20221222 15:29:07

Fantray3  green  Fantray3_1      55%       INTAKE     Present        OK  20221222 15:29:07

Fantray3  green  Fantray3_2      56%       INTAKE     Present        OK  20221222 15:29:07

Fantray4  green  Fantray4_1      55%       INTAKE     Present        OK  20221222 15:29:07

Fantray4  green  Fantray4_2      56%       INTAKE     Present        OK  20221222 15:29:07

Fantray5  green  Fantray5_1      56%       INTAKE     Present        OK  20221222 15:29:07

Fantray5  green  Fantray5_2      56%       INTAKE     Present        OK  20221222 15:29:07

Fantray6  green  Fantray6_1      56%       INTAKE     Present        OK  20221222 15:29:07

Fantray6  green  Fantray6_2      56%       INTAKE     Present        OK  20221222 15:29:07

Fantray7  green  Fantray7_1      55%       INTAKE     Present        OK  20221222 15:29:07

Fantray7  green  Fantray7_2      56%       INTAKE     Present        OK  20221222 15:29:07

 N/A    N/A   PSU1_FAN1      29%       INTAKE     Present        OK  20221222 15:29:07

 N/A    N/A   PSU2_FAN1      29%       INTAKE     Present        OK  20221222 15:29:07
@Yagami-Jiang
Copy link
Author

@spilkey-cisco Could you help me to fix this issue?

@spilkey-cisco
Copy link
Contributor

Speed tolerance is no longer a required field or method for vendors to implement, as it has been replaced by is_under_speed and is_over_speed. health_checker.py should be updated to use these new APIs instead of hard-coding calculations for speed_min_th and speed_max_th.

@spilkey-cisco
Copy link
Contributor

I can open a PR for this shortly.

@Yagami-Jiang
Copy link
Author

I can open a PR for this shortly.

Sorry, do you mean you will open a PR for health_checker.py , right?

@spilkey-cisco
Copy link
Contributor

I can open a PR for this shortly.

Sorry, do you mean you will open a PR for health_checker.py , right?

Do you mean hardware_checker.py, as that's where the issue was reported? I will open a PR to fix hardware_checker.py.

@Yagami-Jiang
Copy link
Author

I can open a PR for this shortly.

Sorry, do you mean you will open a PR for health_checker.py , right?

Do you mean hardware_checker.py, as that's where the issue was reported? I will open a PR to fix hardware_checker.py.

Yes. So, please let me know if you open a PR to fix hardware_checker.py. Very Thx

@spilkey-cisco
Copy link
Contributor

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants