remove extra code

nexus/inventory/src/builder.rs

@@ -37,9 +37,6 @@ pub struct CollectionBuilder {
     baseboards: BTreeSet<Arc<BaseboardId>>,
     cabooses: BTreeSet<Arc<Caboose>>,
     sps: BTreeMap<Arc<BaseboardId>, ServiceProcessor>,
-    // ignition_found: Vec<SpIdentifier>,
-    // ignition_powered_off: Vec<SpIdentifier>,
-    // ignition_missing: Vec<SpIdentifier>,
 }
 
 impl CollectionBuilder {
@@ -52,9 +49,6 @@ impl CollectionBuilder {
             baseboards: BTreeSet::new(),
             cabooses: BTreeSet::new(),
             sps: BTreeMap::new(),
-            // ignition_found: vec![],
-            // ignition_powered_off: vec![],
-            // ignition_missing: vec![],
         }
     }
 
@@ -71,56 +65,6 @@ impl CollectionBuilder {
         }
     }
 
-    // XXX-dap I think this just belongs in the caller.
-    //    pub fn found_ignition(
-    //        &mut self,
-    //        sp_id: SpIdentifier,
-    //        ignition: SpIgnition,
-    //    ) {
-    //        let mut vec = match ignition {
-    //            SpIgnition::Yes { power: true, .. } => &mut self.ignition_found,
-    //            SpIgnition::Yes { power: false, .. } => {
-    //                &mut self.ignition_powered_off
-    //            }
-    //            SpIgnition::No => &mut self.ignition_missing,
-    //        };
-    //
-    //        vec.push(sp_id);
-    //    }
-
-    // XXX-dap this model here, where we invoke enum_ignition() and then
-    // powered_on_sps() and expect to do enum_sp() after that...it's promising,
-    // but I think it currently assumes that SpIdentifiers will be consistent
-    // across MGS instances.  It would be better to avoid this if we can.  And
-    // we should be able to.
-    //
-    // I think it's really more like:
-    //
-    // - found_mgs_client(mgs_client)
-    // - enum_mgs_clients(): for each:
-    //    - found_ignition(client, ignition)
-    // - next_wanted() returns an (mgs_client, sp_id, SpInfoWanted)
-    //    - SpInfoWanted = State | Caboose1 | Caboose2 | ...
-    //    - this tells the caller exactly what to do next
-    //    - am I putting too much control flow into this struct?  wasn't the
-    //      idea to make this simple and passive and _not_ include all that
-    //      logic?  That's a nice idea but the problem is that intrinsically one
-    //      needs the state about what information we have about what SPs and
-    //      which MGS's we've tried in order to decide what to do next
-    //    - but this approach is not concurrency-friendly, and I don't really
-    //      see a way to make it concurrency-friendly without baking the whole
-    //      thing into this struct, which, again, defeats the point.
-    //
-    //      That brings me back to: let's make this thing really simple.  Caller
-    //      reports what it's found.  Caller is responsible for control flow and
-    //      figuring out what's next and in what order.
-    //
-    // Next step: rethink this struct, then go back to collector.rs and write a
-    // driver.
-    //pub fn powered_on_sps(&self) -> impl Iterator<Item = SpIdentifier> {
-    //    self.ignition_found.iter().cloned();
-    //}
-
     pub fn found_sp_state(
         &mut self,
         source: &str,