Wrong and mismatched hardware asset info

[tokazaki3]

Sorry, please let me correct from d) Family Intel Core i7 CPU M 620 Processor to d) Family Intel Core i7 Processor as for WebUI case of 9).

Hi, I have found some wrong and mismatched hardware asset info between on Manageability Commander Tool v7.0.11161.2 (AMT Commander) and on WebUI. SUT is a Calpella machine.

Are below 1) to 3) and 7) to 9) all AMT Commander s bug and below 4) to 6) expected behavior?

Phenomenon:

1) AMT Commander> Hardware Asset> System Motherboard shows 'Asset Tag CIM_Card' while WEBUI> System Information> Base Board> Asset tag shows blank.

2) AMT Commander> Hardware Asset> System Motherboard shows Replaceable is 'Unknown' while WEBUI> System Information> Base Board shows Replaceable is 'No'. 3) AMT Commander> Hardware Asset> System BIOS> Release Date shows 2011-11-11T00:00:00Z while WEBUI> System Information> BIOS> Release date shows 11/11/2011.

4) AMT Commander> Hardware Asset> System BIOS> Characteristics doesnt show such features as floppy services, Print Screen service, and etc. that WEBUI> System Information> BIOS> Supported functions does.

5) AMT Commander> Hardware Asset> Media Device shows Max Media Size is 160 Gigabytes while WEBUI> Disk Information> Disk1 shows Size is 152627MB.

6) AMT Commander> Hardware Asset> Media Device shows Supported Capabilities, e.g. Removable Media feature set, but WEBUI> Disk Information> Disk1 doesn't.

7) AMT Commander> Hardware Asset> System Memory shows Speed is 1 Megahertz while WEBUI> Memory Information> Module 1 shows Speed is 533 MHz.

8) AMT Commander> Hardware Asset> Computer System shows UUID is '00530035-2345-6781-0081-aa0053aa0035' while WEBUI> System Information> Platform shows System ID is '35005300-4523-8167-2345-aa0053aa0035'.

9) AMT Commander> Hardware Asset> System Processor shows a) Socket Designation (Null), b) Identifier 0, c) Socket Populated True, d) Family 198, while WEBUI> Processor Information> Processor 1 shows a) Socket Onboard, b) ID 13829424153406604882, c) Populated? Yes, d) Family Intel Core i7 CPU M 620 Processor.

Reproduction:

1) Connect SUT and Console via wired LAN with HUB.

2) Configure AMT via MEBx on SUT with PP2.

3) Connect SUT and Console via WebUI.

4) Connect SUT and Console via Manageability Commander Tool v7.0.11161.2 on Console.

5) Check and compare both hardware asset information shown on WebUI and on Manageability Commander Tool.

[Judy_H_Intel]

Hi tokazaki3,
I'm a little unsure about what you are asking, if anything, here. As far as I know, Intel does not own WebUI, so we certainly can't determine why the information they display is different.

For each of the items, though, here are my thoughts:
1) Why is this a bug of the Commander tool? Seems like WebUI doesn't have information that the Intel tool finds.
2)The Intel tool shows "unknown" and the WebUI shows "no". To me that means WebUI didn't know, so they set it to "no" .
3)The release dates here are the same, but they are in different formats, probably based on how they were localized.
4) I'm not convinced that BIOS/ Characteristics is the same as BIOS/Supported Functions
5) Maybe Max media size is not the same as size. I'm thinking that WebUI is showing available size since the boot manager partitions off a piece.
6) Again, I think you are trying to compare apples to oranges.
7)The terminolgy they are using to define Speed might be different than the Commander Tool's definition.
8) To me, this is likely a difference of reading the number in Little endian versus Big endian. I don't know which is correct, but since this is an Intel system, I'm betting the Commander has it correct.
9)Here it feels like even though you have the latest Commander tool, it doesn't get updated very often (I think once a year). It's possible it doesn't have all of the latest processor information available, and therefore can't display it.

Sure, these may be "bugs" of the Commander tool and I will forward your post to the team that handles that tool.

Just understand that the tool was created to give you an example of how a tool you can create would work. It was never intended to be an expert detecter of system information.

Cheers,
Judy

[RBens2]

Hi tokazaki3,

I would go with the information that's coming out of WebUI instead of the info that's coming from Commander. It looks like you're seeing some differences in the way that the ME is interpreting the SMBIOS tables and how the values are being mapped in the WSMAN interface of Commander. For instance, I can just about guarantee that the presentation of the system UUID is correct in the WebUI, because that's been correct since the release of AMT 2.5 in 2007.

Regards,
Roger

[tokazaki3]

HI, Judy,

Thank you for your reply and valuable comments.

My purpose is to send this phenomenon to the DTK development team and to ask if they are expected behaviors and if not, to ask if they are AMT Commanders bugs.

I read the sentence Please direct any questions about the DTK to the ISN Manageability Community Forum. at its download page (http://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/download-the-latest-version-of-manageability-developer-tool-kit/). However this Intel vPro Software Development page was shown when I clicked the thumbnail and I couldnt find Manageability Community Forum from the forum pull down menu of the create thread page. So I posted the thread to this forum. If I missed the forum selection, I have to apologize. Please tell me the correct forum I should post on.

Anyway thank you for your kindness to forward my post to the team that handles that tool. If I should do next, for example, repost at the correct forum or send the bug report directly to some in-change person, please teach me.

I have to apologize for the description mismatched. It may be unmatched properly and unmatched may be natural because apples and oranges are different.

I know WebUI is an Intel recommended tool and AMT Commander is a non- recommended tool for official use. However AMT Commander is a convenient tool for me and I know some ISV added it in their management software though I am not sure the added is customized or derived from SDK. So I am concerned with the quality of the latest AMT Commander though I know it is an example.

As for 9), the latest AMT Commander is published on June 13, 2011 by the download page info and the system (SUT) I checked is a Calpella machine that means a 2010 model. So it feels that it can have all of the Calpella machines processor information and display it.

Thanks in advance.

Hi, Roger,

Thank you for your reply and comments. As for 8), I agree the presentation of the system UUID is correct in the WebUI.

Best regards, tokazaki3.

[Gael_H_Intel]

Hi Tokazaki3,

First, I would trust the WebUi before I would trust the Commander. I would like to share with you, the "open source" version of the Developer's toolkit. It is more up-to-date and may even replace our current DTK that is available on the vPro Developer's Community. It also has a link where you can submit defect reports.

Please let us know if you try it out and if the asset data looks to be correct or at least agree with what the WebUI is reporting?

Which OEM system are you running the tools against?

Thanks,
Gael

[tokazaki3]

Hi, Gael,

Thanks for your reply and valuable advice. I have checked with the latest the "open source" version of the Developer's toolkit, Management Commander Tool Mesh Edition v0.0.78 but it shows the same except for below:

4) System BIOS> Characteristics has changed not even to show such features as floppy services, Print Screen service, and only to show 0x0.

5) Media Device> Max Media Size has changed from 160 Gigabytes to 152 Megabytes.

So the asset data never looks to come to be correct. I agree with what the WebUI is reporting seems correct. I will feedback to ylian.saint-hilaire@intel.com following the link. Thank you very much, Gael, Judy, Roger.

Best regards, tokazaki3.

[RBens2]

Hi Tokazaki3,

Actually, from your original posting you can see that Commander has the disk size of 160GB and WebUI says 152627MB. If you consider that the latter number is actually in MiB, then you see that
160GB = 152627MiB; where GB is 10^9 bytes, and MiB is 1024^2 bytes. This is from the classic debate on whether or not to show HDD sizes in binary values or decimal numbers. HDD manufacturers usually use decimal sincethey get a larger value.

Regards,
Roger

[SergeyKostrov]

>>...160 GB = 152627 MiB...

152,627* 1,024 = 156,290,048 ~= 160 GB

Hardware and Software manufacturersalways round a value...

[tokazaki3]

Hi, Roger,

Thank you for your suggestion. I have feed-backed this to ylian.saint-hilaire@intel.com.

Thank you very much.

Best regards,tokazaki3.