All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: khali@linux-fr.org (Jean Delvare)
To: lm-sensors@vger.kernel.org
Subject: unknown eeprom type (65) [ticket #1449]
Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 06:24:26 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20031125211929.1566a2b8.khali@linux-fr.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1069703037.8309.4.camel@localhost>

> Requested output below...Sensors installed on this machine are CVS as
> of a few days ago...I had to tweak a file to get the package to build
> but it was for an unresolved definition for the
> <kernel/chips/fscher.c> driver file. Should not have affected anything
> I hope.

This probably means that lm_sensors2 used older i2c headers. Did you
also install i2c-2.8.1 or CVS? It's a requirement.

> Interesting side note...I have two systems both with the same
> Motherboard and RAM setup, basically both system are identical except
> for video card and peripherals.  One, the one with the issues, is
> running redhat 9 somewhat up2date and the other Fedora Core
> 1(evaluating prior to second system install).  The thing that's
> interesting is the Fedora Core 1 lm_sensors works out of the box,
> sensors are functioning.  Also sensors-detect only suggested i2c-isa
> and w83781d with Fedora Core 1.  Redhat 9 suggested those two plus
> eeprom and i2c-nforce2.  Not sure if that's anything but I thought it
> was odd...Just wanted to mention.

This just means that Fedora has no support for the nForce2 yet (it's
faitly recent), and the nForce2 gives access to eeproms. So there's
nothing to be afraid of, and no one to blame either.

> [root@workstation1 root]# cat /proc/sys/dev/sensors/eeprom-i2c-0-50/*
> 127 127 158 0 0 0 0 0 1 67 77 88 50 53 54 65
> 45 51 50 48 48 76 76 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 127 127 158 0 0 0 0 0 1 67 77 88 50 53 54 65
> 45 51 50 48 48 76 76 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 127 127 158 0 0 0 0 0 1 67 77 88 50 53 54 65
> 45 51 50 48 48 76 76 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 127 127 158 0 0 0 0 0 1 67 77 88 50 53 54 65
> 45 51 50 48 48 76 76 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 127 127 158 0 0 0 0 0 1 67 77 88 50 53 54 65
> 45 51 50 48 48 76 76 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 127 127 158 0 0 0 0 0 1 67 77 88 50 53 54 65
> 45 51 50 48 48 76 76 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 127 127 158 0 0 0 0 0 1 67 77 88 50 53 54 65
> 45 51 50 48 48 76 76 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 127 127 158 0 0 0 0 0 1 67 77 88 50 53 54 65
> 45 51 50 48 48 76 76 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

This is odd, and answers my questions. The driver is broken. This should
be the same (in decimal) as what i2cdump shows (in hexadecimal). And as
you can see, it isn't the case. Rows 04 and 05 are repeated instead.

Now, there are two possibilities. Either the driver doesn't return the
correct values, or the procfs interface to the driver is broken.

Please provide the output of "ls -l
/proc/sys/dev/sensors/eeprom-i2c-0-50".

Thanks.

-- 
Jean Delvare
http://www.ensicaen.ismra.fr/~delvare/

  parent reply	other threads:[~2005-05-19  6:24 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2005-05-19  6:24 unknown eeprom type (65) [ticket #1449] Fernando Rocha Durso
2005-05-19  6:24 ` Mark Studebaker
2005-05-19  6:24 ` Jean Delvare
2005-05-19  6:24 ` Jean Delvare [this message]
2005-05-19  6:24 ` McClintock William J Contr MCOM
2005-05-19  6:24 ` Jean Delvare
2005-05-19  6:24 ` McClintock William J Contr MCOM
2005-05-19  6:24 ` Fernando Rocha Durso
2005-05-19  6:24 ` Mark Studebaker
2005-05-19  6:24 ` Mark Studebaker
2005-05-19  6:24 ` Jean Delvare
2005-05-19  6:24 ` Mark Studebaker
2005-05-19  6:24 ` Mark Studebaker
2005-05-19  6:24 ` Jean Delvare
2005-05-19  6:24 ` Jean Delvare
2005-05-19  6:24 ` Fernando Durso
2005-05-19  6:24 ` Fernando Rocha Durso
2005-05-19  6:24 ` McClintock William J Contr MCOM
2005-05-19  6:24 ` McClintock William J Contr MCOM
2005-05-19  6:24 ` Jean Delvare
2005-05-19  6:24 ` McClintock William J Contr MCOM
2005-05-19  6:24 ` Jean Delvare
2005-05-19  6:24 ` McClintock William J Contr MCOM
2005-05-19  6:24 ` Mark Studebaker
2005-05-19  6:24 ` Fernando Durso
2005-05-19  6:24 ` Fernando Rocha Durso
2005-05-19  6:24 ` Jean Delvare
2005-05-19  6:24 ` Mark Studebaker
2005-05-19  6:24 ` McClintock William J Contr MCOM
2005-05-19  6:24 ` Mark Studebaker
2005-05-19  6:24 ` McClintock William J Contr MCOM

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20031125211929.1566a2b8.khali@linux-fr.org \
    --to=khali@linux-fr.org \
    --cc=lm-sensors@vger.kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.