[Nut-upsdev] GPIO as NUT driver interface?

[MODRIS BĒRZONIS]

Jim,

generic_gpio is fine for me. This opens some thinking about some common 
code parts in any kind of NUT driver: when we talk about status
handling at some point we have to have determination of how to transform 
protocol flow into true/false values for states and setting of states is 
somewhat
common. Actually we need to talk about true only. But assume this out of 
scope of discussion.

Very formal naming might be easy from development process set-up, but 
for end user name with known wording would be better.

Modris

On 2/22/23 18:08, Jim Klimov wrote:
> Great, thanks!
>
> Also just for context, this sounded reminiscent of one of the first 
> NUT drivers, `genericups` (for simple contact-closure support, with 
> IIRC serial-port connections rather than GPIO).
>
> Nearby there's also a `generic_modbus" name. Wondering if the new 
> driver should be (similar to) `generic_gpio`.
>
> @Community verdict: Then there was also an effort some years ago to 
> name drivers with a `nutdrv-*` prefix... WDYT?
>
> As usual, naming is among the hardest problems in IT ;)
>
> Jim
>
> On Wed, Feb 22, 2023 at 4:34 PM MODRIS BĒRZONIS <modrisb at apollo.lv> wrote:
>
>     Jim,
>
>     no, there are no changes in adelsystem.
>
>     Driver's implementation is based on libgpiod, assume this would be
>     natural to call driver gpio, i2c uses different library to
>     communicate. Yes, any UPS with open collector pins should work,
>     configuration rules will tune behavior needed for NUT.
>
>     Just created PR https://github.com/networkupstools/nut/pull/1855 .
>
>     Modris
>
>     On 2/21/23 22:33, Jim Klimov wrote:
>>     Thanks, looks promising.
>>
>>     Were there any changes to adelsystem sources? (Not on PC now to
>>     check quickly).
>>
>>     Also `gpio` naming is too generic (might mean helpers to talk to
>>     gpio pins, e.g. some code shareable by i2c or something of the
>>     sort). Does this handle GPIO UPSes in general (e.g. helped by
>>     `rules` line arg), or more tightly aimed at certain models like
>>     yours?
>>
>>     Style-wise, there's indeed a fair amount of clean-up desireable.
>>     Can you post a PR with this (or improved) codebase, at least to
>>     claim a commit in git history? :) A man page would be nice.
>>
>>     Jim
>>
>>
>>     On Tue, Feb 21, 2023, 20:49 MODRIS BĒRZONIS <modrisb at apollo.lv>
>>     wrote:
>>
>>         Hi!
>>
>>         I have CyberPower CyberShield CSN27U12V UPS. This device
>>         don't have
>>         usual for UPS interface, just open collector pins. I
>>         connected these
>>         pins to GPIO interface on Orange Pi Zero and wrote NUT driver
>>         for this
>>         case. Any interest from NUT community to add this driver to
>>         regular
>>         build tree?
>>
>>         See driver code in attachment. Code is fully functional,
>>         needs cleanup
>>         to match coding guidelines and needs more tests for rules
>>         processing
>>         part. Driver reads GPIO line statuses and transforms them to NUT
>>         statuses using short rules description parameter in the form
>>         of status
>>         strings and logical operations on line values.
>>
>>         Modris
>>
>>         _______________________________________________
>>         Nut-upsdev mailing list
>>         Nut-upsdev at alioth-lists.debian.net
>>         https://alioth-lists.debian.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nut-upsdev
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://alioth-lists.debian.net/pipermail/nut-upsdev/attachments/20230222/6034d1e7/attachment-0001.htm>