Skip to content

RBMC: Add PeerConnected to rbmctool output#145

Merged
spinler merged 2 commits intoibm-openbmc:1210from
spinler:rbmctool_peer_connected
Apr 22, 2026
Merged

RBMC: Add PeerConnected to rbmctool output#145
spinler merged 2 commits intoibm-openbmc:1210from
spinler:rbmctool_peer_connected

Conversation

@spinler
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@spinler spinler commented Apr 17, 2026

Since the RBMC code uses PeerConnected to enable redundancy, and will wait on it to change to connected, display the value in the rbmctool output.

Only display it if it isn't Connected, as normal operation is for it to be connected assuming the sibling BMC is present.

Also read the real value for the provisioned property, and only display that when it is false. Change the field name to 'Paired' since that is the correct name.

Since the RBMC code uses PeerConnected to enable redundancy, and will
wait on it to change to connected, display the value in the rbmctool
output.

Only display it if it isn't Connected, as normal operation is for it to
be connected assuming the sibling BMC is present.

Tested:
```
Local BMC
-----------------------------
...
Provisioned:          true
Peer Connected:       NotConnected <-----
Role Reason:          Failover
```

Change-Id: Ibe8d992e460af80901b34b68b22a21c8694fbcca
Signed-off-by: Matt Spinler <spinler@us.ibm.com>
Use the real 'provisioned' value from the provisioning service for that
rbmctool field.

Also, only display it if it is false, since that is the interesting
value, and after the system is initially paired the value won't change
again (until a factory reset).

Finally, change the field name from 'Provisioned' to 'Paired' since that
is the correct term.

Tested:
- When not paired, value is seen:

...
Paired:               false
Peer Connected:       NotConnected
...

- When paired, value goes away

Change-Id: I2310cbc68db7c04bd9c7368128eab9c3c8e3677b
Signed-off-by: Matt Spinler <spinler@us.ibm.com>
@spinler spinler merged commit 2dcdf6e into ibm-openbmc:1210 Apr 22, 2026
1 check passed
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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants