abb/ssc600: add support for PCI passthrough protection communication port

[dupremathieu]

The 1.5 release of the ABB SSC600 template adds support for the protection communication port. This is a PCI passthrough interface that allows the VM to communicate with the protection devices.

Update the template to include the protection communication port and update the example inventory file to include the new configuration.

[dupremathieu]

TODO:

• test the configuration with an SSC600 VM
• update the documentation in the README and the wiki

[dupremathieu]

It was not clear to me if the protection interface replaces the process bus interface, or if it is another interface.

The ABB SSC600 documentation: https://techdoc.relays.protection-control.abb/r/SSC600-and-SSC600-SW-Engineering-Manual/1.5/en-US/VM-configuration

[eroussy]

Can you upload the schema in svg ?
It will allow to modify it later if we need.

The rest seems good to me

[dupremathieu]

Can you upload the schema in svg ? It will allow to modify it later if we need.

The rest seems good to me

The schema sources are exported as PNG metadata.
It was created using draw.io. You can open it in the same way you open .drawio files.

[eroussy]

I validate, but please wait for ABB test before merging that.

[n-pochet]

@dupremathieu Please be aware that during our tests we've figured out that there's some discrepancy between what's in the inventory and in the template regarding the PCI passthrough interface.
See

ansible/templates/vm/ssc600.xml.j2

Line 104 in 4ccd29d

{% if vm.protection_port is defined %}

vs

ansible/inventories/providers/abb/ssc600_vm_example.yaml

Line 21 in 4ccd29d

protection_ports: # Protection communication port

protection_port vs protection_ports

And there's another typo in

ansible/templates/vm/ssc600.xml.j2

Line 108 in 4ccd29d

<address domain="{{ vm.protection_portci.domain }}" bus="{{ vm.protection_port.bus }}" slot="{{ vm.protection_port.slot }}" function="{{ vm.protection_port.function }}"/>

where it says protection_portci.

It should ideally be decided if the plural or singular form should be used and ensure that all used variables have the same name.

[dupremathieu]

Maybe we can describe the interface inside the VM:

• "Rear"
• "Process bus"
• "Protection communication"

[eroussy]

I will not describe that here. IMO the inventory must describe the interfaces given to the VM, but not directly what interface will be used for what.
This can be done afterwards inside the WebHMI of the VM

[dupremathieu]

LGTM