LCDProc 0.5.4-dev

[fmertz]

@stephenw10:

@fmertz:

Somehow the existing WGXepc code does not seem to line up with the spec…

Hmm, in what way?
There was a problem because the GPIO base is set to a non-standard value on the X-core.
On the other boxes it is at 0x480, which I believe is the standard value where as the X-Core is at 0x4080.

Steve

The way I read it, this particular device ID is an ICH2, and has the GPIO base port stored at offset 0x58 (page 9-1). Fine. The value at that offset happens to be 4081, which, masked off is 4080 (this was listed in the pciconf command, and is already in your code). Fine. In your code, you use port 4080 + 0x0f. Offset 15 in the GPIO area is for GPIO level, and bits control pins. Fine. The blink register is at offset 0x18 (32 bit), so I am not sure how it can blink with just the level register, or how it is not possible to turn the LEDs off…

For the X-Core-e, the Level port controls on/off, the Blink port controls the, well, blinking, and it all can be turned off with putting the bit to zero.

[stephenw10]

I had to re-read the thread to remind myself what happened. I agree with you it doesn't make any sense! In fact you can see, here, where I was expecting the registers to work as you describe above but the experimental results show otherwise.

One thing that is different about the X-core is that you can set the LED state in the BIOS (though I've never tried it myself). And you have a choice of red or green and fast or slow flash. There is no fast/slow blink described in the documentation yet it is clearly available.  :-\

Steve

[tix]

Hello

I've tried the latest .92 package and my x-core will still become unresponsive at the 10 hour mark.

I'm out of ideas on what the issue could be… :(

[mdima]

@tix:

Hello

I've tried the latest .92 package and my x-core will still become unresponsive at the 10 hour mark.

I'm out of ideas on what the issue could be… :(

Hi Tix,
  Thank you for the feedback. I am trying a new version with a lot of changes, if it passes my tests I will publish it… Cross your fingers...

Ciao,
  Michele

[fmertz]

@mdima:

@tix:

Hello

I've tried the latest .92 package and my x-core will still become unresponsive at the 10 hour mark.

I'm out of ideas on what the issue could be… :(

Hi Tix,
   Thank you for the feedback. I am trying a new version with a lot of changes, if it passes my tests I will publish it… Cross your fingers...

Ciao,
   Michele

Shot in the dark: is the client reading the responses back from LCDd? The release notes mentioned something about ignoring them causing unpleasant behavior …

[Cino]

I'm noticing a bug that I haven't seen since before the re-write of the package. If my second WAN does down (3G wireless), and comes back up; lcdclient seems to lose the connection to LCDd. In the past I would have pages of errors in the system log. but i dont have any this time. I do want to say this started with the last changes.

Still want to see if I can reproduce this on the fly (maybe tin cup around the 3G Wireless USB stick) but wanted to report it

Edit: I think this may have been a fluke… my 3g went down a couple of times last night and no issues with lcdproc

[mdima]

@fmertz:

@mdima:

@tix:

Hello
I've tried the latest .92 package and my x-core will still become unresponsive at the 10 hour mark.
I'm out of ideas on what the issue could be… :(

Hi Tix,
  Thank you for the feedback. I am trying a new version with a lot of changes, if it passes my tests I will publish it… Cross your fingers...

Ciao,
  Michele

Shot in the dark: is the client reading the responses back from LCDd? The release notes mentioned something about ignoring them causing unpleasant behavior …

Fmertz,
  what do you mean? I just read the entire changelog and the release notes but I didn't find anything about that. Can you give me some references?

EDIT: Btw, yes, the client is reading the responses and log on pfSense if there is some error reported (messages with huh?)

Now I am running the binary 0.5.3 and the package 0.9.2 to see what changes. With 0.5.5 it looks like there are some problems having more than one screen, like there are problems for LCDd to "switch" during the screen rotation.

If you all set only one screen with 0.5.3 and pkg 0.9.2 do you have this problem?

Thanks,
Michele

[mdima]

@Cino:

I'm noticing a bug that I haven't seen since before the re-write of the package. If my second WAN does down (3G wireless), and comes back up; lcdclient seems to lose the connection to LCDd. In the past I would have pages of errors in the system log. but i dont have any this time. I do want to say this started with the last changes.

Still want to see if I can reproduce this on the fly (maybe tin cup around the 3G Wireless USB stick) but wanted to report it

Edit: I think this may have been a fluke… my 3g went down a couple of times last night and no issues with lcdproc

Hi Cino,
  well, this should have start with the last version of the package.

Before the LCDclient was trying to connect to LCDd forever (which caused endless lists of log entries and high CPU usage), now if it fails for 3 times straight it will end. In the while if LCDd restart to respond, it connects and resets the error counter.

I can understand that a gateway failture may cause a reset of the routes and the states, but if the client gets disconnected it starts other 2 times to reconnect (about 10 seconds between each attempt). Maybe we should increase it to 4… what do you think about it?

Thanks,
Michele

[fmertz]

@mdima:

@fmertz:

Shot in the dark: is the client reading the responses back from LCDd? The release notes mentioned something about ignoring them causing unpleasant behavior …

Fmertz,
  what do you mean? I just read the entire changelog and the release notes but I didn't find anything about that. Can you give me some references?

EDIT: Btw, yes, the client is reading the responses and log on pfSense if there is some error reported (messages with huh?)

https://github.com/fmertz/sdeclcd/blob/master/BUGS

The documentation for responses is here: http://lcdproc.sourceforge.net/docs/lcdproc-0-5-5-dev.html#language-messages

It says: LCDd can send messages back to the client. These messages can be directly related to the last command, or generated for some other reason. Because messages can be generated at any moment, the client should read from the connection at regular intervals. A very simple client could simply ignore all received messages. Not reading the messages will cause trouble !

I read this to mean that LCDd could generate more than one response to a command, or even send text outside of typical responses to commands. Does the PHP code accommodate for this? Reading the code, there seems to be the assumption that only 1 response comes back, maybe leaving responses hanging, and slowly filling the buffer. Just a thought.

[mdima]

@fmertz:

It says: LCDd can send messages back to the client. These messages can be directly related to the last command, or generated for some other reason. Because messages can be generated at any moment, the client should read from the connection at regular intervals. A very simple client could simply ignore all received messages. Not reading the messages will cause trouble !

I read this to mean that LCDd could generate more than one response to a command, or even send text outside of typical responses to commands. Does the PHP code accommodate for this? Reading the code, there seems to be the assumption that only 1 response comes back, maybe leaving responses hanging, and slowly filling the buffer. Just a thought.

well… the client polls the data from LCDd, but maybe it's not enough... I am trying to see if I can do that better... in the while THANKS for the suggestions, this looks to me as the right direction! ;)

[mdima]

If could be REALLY that… I am deeply debugging, and I found out that for each command I send to LCDd, this answer with some answer MORE... so in the end I send:

widget_set scr_time text_wdgt 1 2 20 2 h 4 "2/7/2012 23:19"
widget_set scr_time text_summary 1 4 "01% 56% 4529 37%"
widget_set scr_uptime text_wdgt 1 2 20 2 h 4 "17 days 9:18"
widget_set scr_uptime text_summary 1 4 "01% 56% 4529 37%"
widget_set scr_system text_wdgt 1 2 20 2 h 4 "CPU 11%, Mem 56%"
widget_set scr_system text_summary 1 4 "01% 56% 4529 37%"
widget_set scr_load text_wdgt 1 2 20 2 h 4 "0.06, 0.04, 0.01"
widget_set scr_load text_summary 1 4 "01% 56% 4529 37%"
widget_set scr_states text_wdgt 1 2 20 2 h 4 "Cur/Max 4578/500000"
widget_set scr_states text_summary 1 4 "01% 56% 4529 37%"
widget_set scr_ipsec text_wdgt 1 2 20 2 h 4 "IPSEC Disabled"
widget_set scr_ipsec text_summary 1 4 "01% 56% 4529 37%"
widget_set scr_traffic title_wdgt 1 1 "IN: 45.1 Kbps"
widget_set scr_traffic text_wdgt 1 2 "OUT: 2.1 Kbps"
widget_set scr_traffic text_summary 1 4 "01% 56% 4529 37%"

and it answers:

success
success
success
success
success
success
success
success
success
success
success
success
success
success
success
ignore scr_system
listen scr_load
ignore scr_load
listen scr_states
ignore scr_states
listen scr_ipsec
ignore scr_ipsec
listen scr_traffic
ignore scr_traffic
listen scr_time
ignore scr_time
listen scr_uptime
ignore scr_uptime
listen scr_system
ignore scr_system
listen scr_load

so if the ratio between write and get is 1:1, sooner or later the LCDd buffer will get full and LCDd will hang. Sorry but I found that code there and I really gave for granted that the ratio was 1:1, but the client gets too many answers from LCDd. The client must to "suck" all that answers in order to keep LCDd stable.

I will test this and publish a new release ASAP!

Ciao,
Michele

[stephenw10]

Looks promising.  :)
More excellent work.

Steve

[tix]

@mdima:

If you all set only one screen with 0.5.3 and pkg 0.9.2 do you have this problem?

Thanks,
Michele

I'm testing now, using only the "Interface Traffic" screen set to WAN.  It doesn't scroll left/right but obviously updates so the updating activity should tell us something I hope.

Will post an update in about 12 hours.

[fmertz]

@mdima:

I will test this and publish a new release ASAP!

Which also can be read the other way (negative test): if you remove the code to read the responses, does LCDd die quickly, with 100% CPU?

[mdima]

@fmertz:

@mdima:

I will test this and publish a new release ASAP!

Which also can be read the other way (negative test): if you remove the code to read the responses, does LCDd die quickly, with 100% CPU?

Hey,
    yes… before was like this:
8 Screen enabled
1 second as interval refresh

LCDd was dieing after about 2h.

With the full read of all the responses, same number of screens and refresh, it is working since 20h and it's still up and running.

This evening I try to close a version and publish it...

Ciao,
Michele

[mdima]

Hi,
  I just released a new version of the package. I feel that we are at a good point.

Here is the changelist:

• Improved the reception of data from LCDd. Now there's a cycle that run until there's no more data do receive. Before that there was the possibility of a buffer overflow in LCDd. The timeout of the receiving socket is 25ms.
• Optimized the number of commands sent to LCDd every cycle. Now it is sent only the half;
• Rewritten with better code the error handling;
• Increased to 3 the number of attempts the client performs to reconnect to LCDd in case of disconnection;
• Simplified the startup scripts. Now lcdproc_client.sh is not generated/run anymore, since the error handling is managed by the client;
• Changed the startup scripts to run both LCDd then the client as "nice" process;
• Capped the wait time between each client cycle to 5 seconds. It still is calculated as the refresh frequency * the number of screen activated, but now it's capped;
• Increased to 8000 chars the trunk of data received from LCDd;
• Improved the "service stop" script. Now it cycle until LCDd is definitely killed and works even if LCDd is hung;
• Added a "welcome" string on the panel at the LCDd startup;

The new package is versioned 0.9.3, I just made a pull request in order to distribute it…

Please give some feedback (including driver, refresh rate, enabled screens and so on)!

Thanks,
Michele

[Cino]

can't wait to give it test drive :-)

[stephenw10]

Woot!  ;D

[mdima]

Ops… I found out a little mistake, I cancelled the pull request, will do it tomorrow morning, I swear!

Sorry buddies...

[tix]

@tix:

@mdima:

If you all set only one screen with 0.5.3 and pkg 0.9.2 do you have this problem?

Thanks,
Michele

I'm testing now, using only the "Interface Traffic" screen set to WAN.  It doesn't scroll left/right but obviously updates so the updating activity should tell us something I hope.

Will post an update in about 12 hours.

Well in 24 hours of running, I've had no issues running with only this screen enabled with the "standard" .92 package.