Re: [PATCH v2 4/5] ipmi/bmc-sim: implement watchdog dont log flag

["Nicholas Piggin" <npiggin@gmail.com>]

On Tue Apr 1, 2025 at 11:05 PM AEST, Corey Minyard wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 01, 2025 at 09:44:11PM +1000, Nicholas Piggin wrote:
>> If the dont-log flag is set in the 'timer use' field for the
>> 'set watchdog' command, a watchdog timeout will not get logged as
>> a timer use expiration.
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>
>> ---
>>  hw/ipmi/ipmi_bmc_sim.c | 32 ++++++++++++++++++++++----------
>>  1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>> 
>> diff --git a/hw/ipmi/ipmi_bmc_sim.c b/hw/ipmi/ipmi_bmc_sim.c
>> index 216bf8ff7f0..3cefc69f8a8 100644
>> --- a/hw/ipmi/ipmi_bmc_sim.c
>> +++ b/hw/ipmi/ipmi_bmc_sim.c
>> @@ -514,7 +514,8 @@ static void gen_event(IPMIBmcSim *ibs, unsigned int sens_num, uint8_t deassert,
>>  
>>  static void sensor_set_discrete_bit(IPMIBmcSim *ibs, unsigned int sensor,
>>                                      unsigned int bit, unsigned int val,
>> -                                    uint8_t evd1, uint8_t evd2, uint8_t evd3)
>> +                                    uint8_t evd1, uint8_t evd2, uint8_t evd3,
>> +                                    bool do_log)
>>  {
>>      IPMISensor *sens;
>>      uint16_t mask;
>> @@ -534,7 +535,7 @@ static void sensor_set_discrete_bit(IPMIBmcSim *ibs, unsigned int sensor,
>>              return; /* Already asserted */
>>          }
>>          sens->assert_states |= mask & sens->assert_suppt;
>> -        if (sens->assert_enable & mask & sens->assert_states) {
>> +        if (do_log && (sens->assert_enable & mask & sens->assert_states)) {
>>              /* Send an event on assert */
>>              gen_event(ibs, sensor, 0, evd1, evd2, evd3);
>>          }
>> @@ -544,7 +545,7 @@ static void sensor_set_discrete_bit(IPMIBmcSim *ibs, unsigned int sensor,
>>              return; /* Already deasserted */
>>          }
>>          sens->deassert_states |= mask & sens->deassert_suppt;
>> -        if (sens->deassert_enable & mask & sens->deassert_states) {
>> +        if (do_log && (sens->deassert_enable & mask & sens->deassert_states)) {
>>              /* Send an event on deassert */
>>              gen_event(ibs, sensor, 1, evd1, evd2, evd3);
>>          }
>> @@ -700,6 +701,7 @@ static void ipmi_sim_handle_timeout(IPMIBmcSim *ibs)
>>  {
>>      IPMIInterface *s = ibs->parent.intf;
>>      IPMIInterfaceClass *k = IPMI_INTERFACE_GET_CLASS(s);
>> +    bool do_log = !IPMI_BMC_WATCHDOG_GET_DONT_LOG(ibs);
>>  
>>      if (!ibs->watchdog_running) {
>>          goto out;
>> @@ -711,14 +713,16 @@ static void ipmi_sim_handle_timeout(IPMIBmcSim *ibs)
>>              ibs->msg_flags |= IPMI_BMC_MSG_FLAG_WATCHDOG_TIMEOUT_MASK;
>>              k->do_hw_op(s, IPMI_SEND_NMI, 0);
>>              sensor_set_discrete_bit(ibs, IPMI_WATCHDOG_SENSOR, 8, 1,
>> -                                    0xc8, (2 << 4) | 0xf, 0xff);
>> +                                    0xc8, (2 << 4) | 0xf, 0xff,
>> +                                    do_log);
>>              break;
>>  
>>          case IPMI_BMC_WATCHDOG_PRE_MSG_INT:
>>              ibs->msg_flags |= IPMI_BMC_MSG_FLAG_WATCHDOG_TIMEOUT_MASK;
>>              k->set_atn(s, 1, attn_irq_enabled(ibs));
>>              sensor_set_discrete_bit(ibs, IPMI_WATCHDOG_SENSOR, 8, 1,
>> -                                    0xc8, (3 << 4) | 0xf, 0xff);
>> +                                    0xc8, (3 << 4) | 0xf, 0xff,
>> +                                    do_log);
>>              break;
>>  
>>          default:
>> @@ -734,28 +738,36 @@ static void ipmi_sim_handle_timeout(IPMIBmcSim *ibs)
>>  
>>   do_full_expiry:
>>      ibs->watchdog_running = 0; /* Stop the watchdog on a timeout */
>> -    ibs->watchdog_expired |= (1 << IPMI_BMC_WATCHDOG_GET_USE(ibs));
>> +
>> +    if (do_log) {
>> +        ibs->watchdog_expired |= (1 << IPMI_BMC_WATCHDOG_GET_USE(ibs));
>> +    }
>> +
>
> This change needs to be removed.  watchdog_expired has nothing to do
> with logs, it's a field reporting in another message.

Okay you're right, I read through the spec again and yes I was
mistaken on this field.

Thanks,
Nick