Re: MIPS64EL port box is ready for use
On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 8:46 PM, Bastien ROUCARIES
<roucaries.bastien@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 8:25 PM, Aron Xu <aron@debian.org> wrote:
>> On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 3:11 AM, Bastien ROUCARIES
>> <roucaries.bastien@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 7:56 PM, Aron Xu <aron@debian.org> wrote:
>>>> On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 2:40 AM, Bastien ROUCARIES
>>>> <roucaries.bastien@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 7:35 PM, Aron Xu <aron@debian.org> wrote:
>>>>>> On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 1:15 AM, Tollef Fog Heen <tfheen@err.no> wrote:
>>>>>>> ]] Aron Xu
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> > IPMI would be lovely, but I'm not sure we can locate a board right now with
>>>>>>>> > that - so, we may have to fix remote management with a remotely controlled
>>>>>>>> > power/reset box - I believe they exist (something else I've been looking
>>>>>>>> > into). If the DSA already use some then I'd be interested to hear which :-)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I don't know if IPMI is available, but there is certain kind of PCI
>>>>>>>> device that can help with remotely power on/off the machine controlled
>>>>>>>> by SMS. I'm curious if DSA think IPMI is mandatory for buildd and
>>>>>>>> porterbox.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We would very much like «reasonable remote access». Whether that's IPMI
>>>>>>> onto a BMC or serial console which can interact with the boot loader and
>>>>>>> a network-enabled power strip is less important. Of course, having nice
>>>>>>> features like mounting of ISOs over HTTP and such is a nice bonus, but
>>>>>>> not a requirement.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We haven't really talked about how and when it should be enforced, but
>>>>>>> I'm reluctant to take on more porter hardware that lacks reasonable
>>>>>>> remote management.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If we can find a way of letting Loongson 3A board supports remote
>>>>>> console then you are able to re-install the system because PMON have
>>>>>> networking support and can boot the system from tftp. Power control
>>>>>> can be done by hacking the on-board power button pins.
>>>>>
>>>>> It could be done trivally from a chip arm card. Using socat from a tty
>>>>> to a ssh tunnel
>>>>> see http://www.dest-unreach.org/socat/doc/socat-ttyovertcp.txt
>>>>
>>>> Looks really cool, and I think it's doable to support power control
>>>> like what you've suggested already.
>>>
>>> What are the safety specification appliable by DSA ? Main tension ?
>>> Does the board have a power brick ?
>>>
>>
>> I'm not sure about DSA's opinion, and here is the information about
>> the board. It is an almost standard ITX one, and we've put it in an
>> ITX chassis retired from a ~2006 Lenovo PC, using its power supply.
>> The board has some pins for connecting power bottons (Power and
>> Reset), though we are not using it because it looks not fit to the
>> connector of the chassis. There is a dedicate button on the board to
>> power on/off the machine as well. We used the on board button and no
>> hard reset needed/conducted since successful installation of hardware.
>> The mentioned ITX machine (6100 model) available for purchase is just
>> a complete PC box.
>
> The mini itx does not specify a power connector.... So if you use an
> atx power control do something like this
> http://www.mupuf.org/blog/2013/05/11/wtrpm-a-web-based-wt-suite-to-power-up-slash-down-your-computers/
Note that I do not recommand to do that this guy has done due to
galvanic isolation problem. You could fry your board with something
like this!
Always use optocoupled MOS, not directly MOSFET
>
>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Aron Xu
Reply to: