[lm-sensors] Asus M2NPV-VM and lm-sensors not working

[lm-sensors] Asus M2NPV-VM and lm-sensors not working

[Prakash Punnoor]

Hi,

the mobo has nforce430 (MCP51) chipset. sensors-detect tells me the it87 
driver should be the right one, but it doesn't seem to help:

lsmod:
Module                  Size  Used by
i2c_dev                 9992  0
it87                   23140  0
hwmon_vid               3456  1 it87
i2c_isa                 4736  1 it87
eeprom                  6736  0
loop                   57172  0
powernow_k8            12640  1
i2c_nforce2             7488  0
nvidia               5424340  12
i2c_core               19776  6 i2c_dev,it87,i2c_isa,eeprom,i2c_nforce2,nvidia

sensors:
Can't access procfs/sysfs file
Unable to find i2c bus information;
For 2.6 kernels, make sure you have mounted sysfs and libsensors
was compiled with sysfs support!
For older kernels, make sure you have done 'modprobe i2c-proc'!

I am using 2.6.18-rc4 kernel with lm-sensors 2.10.0

Any idea what to do? Thx.


# sensors-detect revision 1.413 (2006/01/19 20:28:00)

This program will help you determine which I2C/SMBus modules you need to
load to use lm_sensors most effectively. You need to have i2c and
lm_sensors installed before running this program.
Also, you need to be `root', or at least have access to the /dev/i2c-*
files, for most things.
If you have patched your kernel and have some drivers built in, you can
safely answer NO if asked to load some modules. In this case, things may
seem a bit confusing, but they will still work.

It is generally safe and recommended to accept the default answers to all
questions, unless you know what you're doing.

 We can start with probing for (PCI) I2C or SMBus adapters.
 You do not need any special privileges for this.
 Do you want to probe now? (YES/no):
Probing for PCI bus adapters...
Sorry, no PCI bus adapters found.

We will now try to load each adapter module in turn.
If you have undetectable or unsupported adapters, you can have them
scanned by manually loading the modules before running this script.

 To continue, we need module `i2c-dev' to be loaded.
 If it is built-in into your kernel, you can safely skip this.
 i2c-dev is not loaded. Do you want to load it now? (YES/no):
 Module loaded succesfully.

 We are now going to do the adapter probings. Some adapters may hang halfway
 through; we can't really help that. Also, some chips will be double detected;
 we choose the one with the highest confidence value in that case.
 If you found that the adapter hung after probing a certain address, you can
 specify that address to remain unprobed. That often
 includes address 0x69 (clock chip).

Next adapter: NVIDIA I2C Device
Do you want to scan it? (YES/no/selectively):

Next adapter: NVIDIA I2C Device
Do you want to scan it? (YES/no/selectively):
Client found at address 0x50
Probing for `SPD EEPROM'... Success!
    (confidence 1, driver `eeprom')
Probing for `DDC monitor'... Success!
    (confidence 8, driver `eeprom'), other addresses: 0x51 0x52 0x53 0x54 0x55 
0x56 0x57
Probing for `Maxim MAX6900'... Failed!

Next adapter: NVIDIA I2C Device
Do you want to scan it? (YES/no/selectively):

Next adapter: SMBus nForce2 adapter at 4c40
Do you want to scan it? (YES/no/selectively):
Client found at address 0x08

Next adapter: SMBus nForce2 adapter at 4c00
Do you want to scan it? (YES/no/selectively):
Client found at address 0x08
Client at address 0x52 can not be probed - unload all client drivers first!
Client at address 0x53 can not be probed - unload all client drivers first!

Some chips are also accessible through the ISA bus. ISA probes are
typically a bit more dangerous, as we have to write to I/O ports to do
this. This is usually safe though.

Do you want to scan the ISA bus? (YES/no):
Probing for `National Semiconductor LM78'
  Trying address 0x0290... Failed!
Probing for `National Semiconductor LM78-J'
  Trying address 0x0290... Failed!
Probing for `National Semiconductor LM79'
  Trying address 0x0290... Failed!
Probing for `Winbond W83781D'
  Trying address 0x0290... Failed!
Probing for `Winbond W83782D'
  Trying address 0x0290... Failed!
Probing for `Winbond W83627HF'
  Trying address 0x0290... Failed!
Probing for `Winbond W83627EHF'
  Trying address 0x0290... Failed!
Probing for `Silicon Integrated Systems SIS5595'
  Trying general detect... Failed!
Probing for `VIA Technologies VT82C686 Integrated Sensors'
  Trying general detect... Failed!
Probing for `VIA Technologies VT8231 Integrated Sensors'
  Trying general detect... Failed!
Probing for `ITE IT8712F'
  Trying address 0x0290... Success!
    (confidence 8, driver `it87')
Probing for `ITE IT8705F / SiS 950'
  Trying address 0x0290... Failed!
Probing for `IPMI BMC KCS'
  Trying address 0x0ca0... Failed!
Probing for `IPMI BMC SMIC'
  Trying address 0x0ca8... Failed!

Some Super I/O chips may also contain sensors. Super I/O probes are
typically a bit more dangerous, as we have to write to I/O ports to do
this. This is usually safe though.

Do you want to scan for Super I/O sensors? (YES/no):
Probing for `ITE 8702F Super IO Sensors'
  Failed! (0x8716)
Probing for `ITE 8705F Super IO Sensors'
  Failed! (0x8716)
Probing for `ITE 8712F Super IO Sensors'
  Failed! (0x8716)
Probing for `Nat. Semi. PC87351 Super IO Fan Sensors'
  Failed! (skipping family)
Probing for `SMSC 47B27x Super IO Fan Sensors'
  Failed! (skipping family)
Probing for `VT1211 Super IO Sensors'
  Failed! (skipping family)
Probing for `Winbond W83627EHF/EHG Super IO Sensors'
  Failed! (skipping family)

Do you want to scan for secondary Super I/O sensors? (YES/no):
Probing for `ITE 8702F Super IO Sensors'
  Failed! (skipping family)
Probing for `Nat. Semi. PC87351 Super IO Fan Sensors'
  Failed! (skipping family)
Probing for `SMSC 47B27x Super IO Fan Sensors'
  Failed! (skipping family)
Probing for `VT1211 Super IO Sensors'
  Failed! (skipping family)
Probing for `Winbond W83627EHF/EHG Super IO Sensors'
  Failed! (skipping family)

 Now follows a summary of the probes I have just done.
 Just press ENTER to continue:

Driver `eeprom' (should be inserted):
  Detects correctly:
  * Bus `NVIDIA I2C Device'
    Busdriver `UNKNOWN', I2C address 0x50 (and 0x51 0x52 0x53 0x54 0x55 0x56 
0x57)
    Chip `DDC monitor' (confidence: 8)

Driver `it87' (should be inserted):
  Detects correctly:
  * ISA bus address 0x0290 (Busdriver `i2c-isa')
    Chip `ITE IT8712F' (confidence: 8)


I will now generate the commands needed to load the I2C modules.

If you want to load the modules at startup, generate a config file
below and make sure lm_sensors gets started at boot time; e.g
$ rc-update add lm_sensors default

To make the sensors modules behave correctly, add these lines to
/etc/modules.d/lm_sensors and run modules-update:

#----cut here----
# I2C module options
alias char-major-89 i2c-dev
#----end cut here----

WARNING! If you have some things built into your kernel, the list above
will contain too many modules. Skip the appropriate ones! You really should
try these commands right now to make sure everything is working properly.
Monitoring programs won't work until it's done.
To load everything that is needed, execute the commands below...

#----cut here----
# I2C adapter drivers
# modprobe unknown adapter NVIDIA I2C Device
# modprobe unknown adapter NVIDIA I2C Device
# modprobe unknown adapter NVIDIA I2C Device
modprobe i2c-isa
# I2C chip drivers
modprobe eeprom
modprobe it87
# sleep 2 # optional
/usr/bin/sensors -s # recommended
#----end cut here----

Do you want to overwrite /etc/conf.d/lm_sensors? Enter s to specify other file 
name?
  (yes/NO/s):


-- 
(?=                 =?)
//\ Prakash Punnoor /\\
V_/                 \_V
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.lm-sensors.org/pipermail/lm-sensors/attachments/20060824/a6cfb9fe/attachment.bin 

[lm-sensors] Asus M2NPV-VM and lm-sensors not working

[Jean Delvare]

Hi Prakash,

> the mobo has nforce430 (MCP51) chipset. sensors-detect tells me the it87 
> driver should be the right one, but it doesn't seem to help:
> 
> lsmod:
> Module                  Size  Used by
> i2c_dev                 9992  0
> it87                   23140  0
> hwmon_vid               3456  1 it87
> i2c_isa                 4736  1 it87
> eeprom                  6736  0
> loop                   57172  0
> powernow_k8            12640  1
> i2c_nforce2             7488  0
> nvidia               5424340  12
> i2c_core               19776  6 i2c_dev,it87,i2c_isa,eeprom,i2c_nforce2,nvidia
> 
> sensors:
> Can't access procfs/sysfs file
> Unable to find i2c bus information;
> For 2.6 kernels, make sure you have mounted sysfs and libsensors
> was compiled with sysfs support!
> For older kernels, make sure you have done 'modprobe i2c-proc'!
> 
> I am using 2.6.18-rc4 kernel with lm-sensors 2.10.0
> 
> Any idea what to do? Thx.

You have a recent ITE Super-I/O, IT8716F, which isn't supported yet.
But you are lucky, I have been working on this in the last two weeks.
You can get a kernel patch here:
http://jdelvare.pck.nerim.net/sensors/hwmon-it8716f-it8718f-v2-2.6.18.patch

And user-space support is available in the latest SVN snapshot of
lm_sensors:
http://dl.lm-sensors.org/lm-sensors/snapshots/lm-sensors-r4108-20060824.tar.bz2

Please report your results!

-- 
Jean Delvare

[lm-sensors] Asus M2NPV-VM and lm-sensors not working

[Prakash Punnoor]

Am Donnerstag 24 August 2006 17:09 schrieb Jean Delvare:
> You have a recent ITE Super-I/O, IT8716F, which isn't supported yet.
> But you are lucky, I have been working on this in the last two weeks.
> You can get a kernel patch here:
> http://jdelvare.pck.nerim.net/sensors/hwmon-it8716f-it8718f-v2-2.6.18.patch
>
> And user-space support is available in the latest SVN snapshot of
> lm_sensors:
> http://dl.lm-sensors.org/lm-sensors/snapshots/lm-sensors-r4108-20060824.tar
>.bz2
>
> Please report your results!

Hi, thx for your prompt reply. Yes I have partial success! :-)

Issues:

1) sensor-detect tells me to inster k8temp, but I can't find it in kernel 
tree.

2) Some values are probably wrong:
it8716-isa-0290
Adapter: ISA adapter
VCore:     +1.04 V  (min =  +4.08 V, max =  +4.08 V)   ALARM
VDDR:      +3.12 V  (min =  +4.08 V, max =  +4.08 V)   ALARM
+3.3V:     +0.00 V  (min =  +4.08 V, max =  +4.08 V)   ALARM
+5V:       +4.84 V  (min =  +6.85 V, max =  +6.85 V)   ALARM
+12V:     +11.46 V  (min = +16.32 V, max = +16.32 V)   ALARM
in5:       +0.00 V  (min =  +4.08 V, max =  +4.08 V)   ALARM
in6:       +0.00 V  (min =  +4.08 V, max =  +4.08 V)   ALARM
5VSB:      +4.70 V  (min =  +6.85 V, max =  +6.85 V)   ALARM
VBat:      +2.86 V
fan1:     1363 RPM  (min = 6490 RPM)                   ALARM
fan2:        0 RPM  (min = 6490 RPM)                   ALARM
fan3:     1566 RPM  (min =    0 RPM)
temp1:       +26?C  (low  =    -1?C, high =    -1?C)   sensor = diode
temp2:       +38?C  (low  =    -1?C, high =    -1?C)   sensor = thermistor
temp3:       +25?C  (low  =    -1?C, high =    -1?C)   sensor = thermistor
vid:       +0.00 V


I am missing my 3.3V readings ;-) I am also pretty sure that VCore is wrong:

I set them to:
powernow-k8:    0 : fid 0xc (2000 MHz), vid 0x11
powernow-k8:    1 : fid 0xa (1800 MHz), vid 0x13
powernow-k8:    2 : fid 0x2 (1000 MHz), vid 0x1b

If I am not mistaken, vid 0x11 is 1.2V and 0x1b is 0.9V. (Does anybody know 
how to calc from hex to vcore?) But sensors shows me 1.04 at 2GHz and 0.8 at 
1GHz. Or do you think the mainboard's volt regulator is that much off?

I have to check fan speed with what the bios reports, but it looks sensible.

Anyways, I am happy that I can finally read out some data. :-))

(Please still cc to me, as I am not subscribed.)

Many thx and cheers,
-- 
(?=                 =?)
//\ Prakash Punnoor /\\
V_/                 \_V
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.lm-sensors.org/pipermail/lm-sensors/attachments/20060824/82bc2d05/attachment.bin 

[lm-sensors] Asus M2NPV-VM and lm-sensors not working

[Prakash Punnoor]

Am Donnerstag 24 August 2006 17:09 schrieb Jean Delvare:
> Please report your results!

Hi, I chekced with my bios and the temps reading seems OK, but fans are off:

CPU: 780
POWER: 777

wheres sensors reports too high values
fan1:     1323 RPM  (min = 6490 RPM)                   ALARM
fan2:        0 RPM  (min = 6490 RPM)                   ALARM
fan3:     1564 RPM  (min =    0 RPM)

Sometimes the reading goes totally crazy. I had times, where fan1 showed 
values over 32000.

fan1:     46551 RPM  (min = 6490 RPM)                   ALARM
fan2:        0 RPM  (min = 6490 RPM)                   ALARM
fan3:     1551 RPM  (min =    0 RPM)

Cheers,
-- 
(?=                 =?)
//\ Prakash Punnoor /\\
V_/                 \_V
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.lm-sensors.org/pipermail/lm-sensors/attachments/20060825/e6e95cbc/attachment.bin 

[lm-sensors] Asus M2NPV-VM and lm-sensors not working

[Jean Delvare]

Hi Prakash,

> Hi, thx for your prompt reply. Yes I have partial success! :-)
> 
> Issues:
> 
> 1) sensor-detect tells me to inster k8temp, but I can't find it in kernel 
> tree.

It's a really new driver written by Rudolf Marek. Get the patch from
here:
http://khali.linux-fr.org/devel/i2c/linux-2.6/hwmon-k8temp-new-driver.patch

Additionally if you want the driver to load automatically, you can
apply this patch of mine on top of the previous one:
http://khali.linux-fr.org/devel/i2c/linux-2.6/hwmon-k8temp-autoload.patch

Both patches will soon be in -mm.

> 2) Some values are probably wrong:
> it8716-isa-0290
> Adapter: ISA adapter
> VCore:     +1.04 V  (min =  +4.08 V, max =  +4.08 V)   ALARM
> VDDR:      +3.12 V  (min =  +4.08 V, max =  +4.08 V)   ALARM
> +3.3V:     +0.00 V  (min =  +4.08 V, max =  +4.08 V)   ALARM
> +5V:       +4.84 V  (min =  +6.85 V, max =  +6.85 V)   ALARM
> +12V:     +11.46 V  (min = +16.32 V, max = +16.32 V)   ALARM
> in5:       +0.00 V  (min =  +4.08 V, max =  +4.08 V)   ALARM
> in6:       +0.00 V  (min =  +4.08 V, max =  +4.08 V)   ALARM
> 5VSB:      +4.70 V  (min =  +6.85 V, max =  +6.85 V)   ALARM
> VBat:      +2.86 V
> fan1:     1363 RPM  (min = 6490 RPM)                   ALARM
> fan2:        0 RPM  (min = 6490 RPM)                   ALARM
> fan3:     1566 RPM  (min =    0 RPM)
> temp1:       +26?C  (low  =    -1?C, high =    -1?C)   sensor = diode
> temp2:       +38?C  (low  =    -1?C, high =    -1?C)   sensor = thermistor
> temp3:       +25?C  (low  =    -1?C, high =    -1?C)   sensor = thermistor
> vid:       +0.00 V
> 
> 
> I am missing my 3.3V readings ;-)

VDDR as +3.12 V is way too high, so my guess is that in1 is actually
+3.3V, and VDDR isn't monitored. So you'll need to adjust the label
lines in the configuration file, then you add ignore statements for
in3, in5 and in6.

Can you copy all the hardware monitoring data provided by your BIOS?
This is the most useful data to customize the configuration file for a
given board.

Vbat is a bit off, is your battery dead already?

> I am also pretty sure that VCore is wrong:

It looks reasonable to me.

> I set them to:
> powernow-k8:    0 : fid 0xc (2000 MHz), vid 0x11
> powernow-k8:    1 : fid 0xa (1800 MHz), vid 0x13
> powernow-k8:    2 : fid 0x2 (1000 MHz), vid 0x1b
> 
> If I am not mistaken, vid 0x11 is 1.2V and 0x1b is 0.9V. (Does anybody know 
> how to calc from hex to vcore?) But sensors shows me 1.04 at 2GHz and 0.8 at 
> 1GHz. Or do you think the mainboard's volt regulator is that much off?

The decoding depends on the CPU. In theory the kernel detects it and
picks the right decoding formula but if your CPU is really new, it
might use a table we don't know yet. What is your exact CPU model?

> I have to check fan speed with what the bios reports, but it looks sensible.

We had reports where the "sensors" fan speeds were twice as high as
what the BIOS reported. I am still investigating to find out which is
right. Are you affected too?

> Anyways, I am happy that I can finally read out some data. :-))

I'm glad it somewhat works. I'll try to improve things a bit, then I'll
push the patches to -mm for wider testing.

Thanks for reporting!

-- 
Jean Delvare

[lm-sensors] Asus M2NPV-VM and lm-sensors not working

[Jean Delvare]

Hi Prakash,

> Hi, I chekced with my bios and the temps reading seems OK, but fans are off:
> 
> CPU: 780
> POWER: 777
> 
> wheres sensors reports too high values
> fan1:     1323 RPM  (min = 6490 RPM)                   ALARM
> fan2:        0 RPM  (min = 6490 RPM)                   ALARM
> fan3:     1564 RPM  (min =    0 RPM)

So you are affected by the problem too...

What do you think are the correct values for your fans, the BIOS' ones,
or sensors' ones?

> Sometimes the reading goes totally crazy. I had times, where fan1 showed 
> values over 32000.
> 
> fan1:     46551 RPM  (min = 6490 RPM)                   ALARM
> fan2:        0 RPM  (min = 6490 RPM)                   ALARM
> fan3:     1551 RPM  (min =    0 RPM)

Very strange. Are you using fan speed control? This could induce some
noise in the speed sensing. Do you have similar effects when looking at
the values in the BIOS?

-- 
Jean Delvare

[lm-sensors] Asus M2NPV-VM and lm-sensors not working

[Prakash Punnoor]

Hi,

> > 1) sensor-detect tells me to inster k8temp, but I can't find it in kernel
> > tree.
>
> It's a really new driver written by Rudolf Marek. Get the patch from
> here:

Yes, I foundit in the mailing list archives. Works nice, unfortunately gkrellm 
doesn't support it yet.

> VDDR as +3.12 V is way too high, so my guess is that in1 is actually
> +3.3V, and VDDR isn't monitored.

Yes, later I thought the same...

> Can you copy all the hardware monitoring data provided by your BIOS?
> This is the most useful data to customize the configuration file for a
> given board.

Here we go:

Vcore 1,35 (so it show 0.05 too little, as stock vcore at 2GHz is 1.4, I 
should have set it down to 1.2 or 1.225, if I calced the hex corretly...)

3.3: 3.22
5: 5.03
12: 11.85

comparing again with sensors:

k8temp-pci-00c3
Adapter: PCI adapter
Core0 Temp:
             +33?C
Core1 Temp:
             +35?C

it8716-isa-0290
Adapter: ISA adapter
VCore:     +0.80 V  (min =  +4.08 V, max =  +4.08 V)   ALARM
VDDR:      +3.12 V  (min =  +4.08 V, max =  +4.08 V)   ALARM
+3.3V:     +0.00 V  (min =  +4.08 V, max =  +4.08 V)   ALARM
+5V:       +4.84 V  (min =  +6.85 V, max =  +6.85 V)   ALARM
+12V:     +11.52 V  (min = +16.32 V, max = +16.32 V)   ALARM
in5:       +0.00 V  (min =  +4.08 V, max =  +4.08 V)   ALARM
in6:       +0.00 V  (min =  +4.08 V, max =  +4.08 V)   ALARM
5VSB:      +4.70 V  (min =  +6.85 V, max =  +6.85 V)   ALARM
VBat:      +2.88 V
fan1:     1800 RPM  (min = 6490 RPM)                   ALARM
fan2:        0 RPM  (min = 6490 RPM)                   ALARM
fan3:     1560 RPM  (min =    0 RPM)
temp1:       +28?C  (low  =    -1?C, high =    -1?C)   sensor = diode
temp2:       +42?C  (low  =    -1?C, high =    -1?C)   sensor = thermistor
temp3:       +25?C  (low  =    -1?C, high =    -1?C)   sensor = thermistor
vid:       +0.00 V

We see that sensors reports a bit too little voltages across the board. 
Interesting that the temp sensors - though conforming to bios values - are 
giving quite ridiculous values. temp2 - motherboard temp - is way higher than 
cpu temp, but on the other hand I don't know where the 2nd sensor is and 
whether the chipset actually gets hotter


> Vbat is a bit off, is your battery dead already?

The board is pretty new and I didn't have cmos problems, so don't think so.

> > I am also pretty sure that VCore is wrong:
>
> It looks reasonable to me.

Nope, if I interpret it correctly
http://lists.lm-sensors.org/pipermail/lm-sensors/2006-August/017356.html

has the same problem if you compare bios vcore and sensors output.


> The decoding depends on the CPU. In theory the kernel detects it and
> picks the right decoding formula but if your CPU is really new, it
> might use a table we don't know yet. What is your exact CPU model?

cpu family      : 15
model           : 75
model name      : AMD Athlon(tm) 64 X2 Dual Core Processor 3800+
stepping        : 2

It is the new AM2 "regular" version.


> > CPU: 780
> > POWER: 777
> >
> > wheres sensors reports too high values
> > fan1:     1323 RPM  (min = 6490 RPM)                   ALARM
> > fan2:        0 RPM  (min = 6490 RPM)                   ALARM
> > fan3:     1564 RPM  (min =    0 RPM)
>
> So you are affected by the problem too...
>
> What do you think are the correct values for your fans, the BIOS' ones,
> or sensors' ones?

I think the bios ones are right, as if I disable fan management, it shows CPU 
fan at 2335 which fits well enough to Artcic Cooling Freezer 64 specs at 
2200rpm. (Yes my machine is "ultra silent", so it is possible that fans run 
at ~800 rpm when idle. It also just consumes 50Watt when idle...)

On the other hand, when I disable fan management, the fan makes quite some 
noise which might be too high for a 2200rpm fan, but maybe I am just used to 
silence. ;-)

> > fan1:     46551 RPM  (min = 6490 RPM)                   ALARM
> > fan2:        0 RPM  (min = 6490 RPM)                   ALARM
> > fan3:     1551 RPM  (min =    0 RPM)
>
> Very strange. Are you using fan speed control? This could induce some
> noise in the speed sensing.

Yes Asus' so called "q-fan2".

> Do you have similar effects when looking at 
> the values in the BIOS?

Well, I haven't observed the bios long enough, as such values usually just 
appear for short times. But I noticed at times the bios also shows wrong 
values, as it shows "0" instead of ~800. Perhaps here the same thing hapens, 
but the bios clips the value correctly?

-- 
(?=                 =?)
//\ Prakash Punnoor /\\
V_/                 \_V
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.lm-sensors.org/pipermail/lm-sensors/attachments/20060825/f44d49e1/attachment.bin 

[lm-sensors] Asus M2NPV-VM and lm-sensors not working

[Jean Delvare]

Hi Prakash,

> I set them to:
> powernow-k8:    0 : fid 0xc (2000 MHz), vid 0x11
> powernow-k8:    1 : fid 0xa (1800 MHz), vid 0x13
> powernow-k8:    2 : fid 0x2 (1000 MHz), vid 0x1b

The K8 family uses the VID conversion table described in AMD document
26094 (Table 74). Inside the kernel it is known as VRM version "2.4.
This table leads me to the following values:

(2000 MHz), vid 0x11 -> 1.125 V
(1800 MHz), vid 0x13 -> 1.075 V
(1000 MHz), vid 0x1b -> 0.875 V

These values are significantly lower than the ones I am used to (1.40
V, 1.35 V and 1.10 V, respectively). I am surprised by your words: "I
set them to"... Do you mean that you somehow _decided_ to use these
values instead of the standard ones?

Please check that the value of /sys/class/hwmon/hwmon0/device/vrm is
8.2 as expected.

> > Can you copy all the hardware monitoring data provided by your BIOS?
> > This is the most useful data to customize the configuration file for a
> > given board.
> 
> Here we go:
> 
> Vcore 1,35 (so it show 0.05 too little, as stock vcore at 2GHz is 1.4, I 
> should have set it down to 1.2 or 1.225, if I calced the hex corretly...)

Again, it sounds like you are underpowering your CPU on purpose?

> 3.3: 3.22
> 5: 5.03
> 12: 11.85
> 
> comparing again with sensors:
> 
> k8temp-pci-00c3
> Adapter: PCI adapter
> Core0 Temp:
>              +33?C
> Core1 Temp:
>              +35?C
> 
> it8716-isa-0290
> Adapter: ISA adapter
> VCore:     +0.80 V  (min =  +4.08 V, max =  +4.08 V)   ALARM
> VDDR:      +3.12 V  (min =  +4.08 V, max =  +4.08 V)   ALARM
> +3.3V:     +0.00 V  (min =  +4.08 V, max =  +4.08 V)   ALARM
> +5V:       +4.84 V  (min =  +6.85 V, max =  +6.85 V)   ALARM
> +12V:     +11.52 V  (min = +16.32 V, max = +16.32 V)   ALARM
> in5:       +0.00 V  (min =  +4.08 V, max =  +4.08 V)   ALARM
> in6:       +0.00 V  (min =  +4.08 V, max =  +4.08 V)   ALARM
> 5VSB:      +4.70 V  (min =  +6.85 V, max =  +6.85 V)   ALARM
> VBat:      +2.88 V
> fan1:     1800 RPM  (min = 6490 RPM)                   ALARM
> fan2:        0 RPM  (min = 6490 RPM)                   ALARM
> fan3:     1560 RPM  (min =    0 RPM)
> temp1:       +28?C  (low  =    -1?C, high =    -1?C)   sensor = diode
> temp2:       +42?C  (low  =    -1?C, high =    -1?C)   sensor = thermistor
> temp3:       +25?C  (low  =    -1?C, high =    -1?C)   sensor = thermistor
> vid:       +0.00 V
> 
> We see that sensors reports a bit too little voltages across the board. 

Indeed, by ~4%. I can't explain it, the way to decode voltage values is
pretty standard at least for voltages below 4.1 V. The fact that even
the battery value is 4% off suggests that this is the ADC not
converting the values properly. This could be caused by a device
misconfiguration, or maybe by the IT8716F chip itself being
underpowered?

The driver should print some messages in the log when you load it, can
you please copy them here?

> Interesting that the temp sensors - though conforming to bios values - are 
> giving quite ridiculous values. temp2 - motherboard temp - is way higher than 
> cpu temp, but on the other hand I don't know where the 2nd sensor is and 
> whether the chipset actually gets hotter

If temp2 is taken on the northbridge, and if you have no northbridge
fan, and if your CPU is underpowered and has a good fan, it may make
sense. I used to tell users that CPU temperature must always be above
motherboard temperature, but I seem to be proven wrong more frequently.

The best way to differenciate between CPU temperature and motherboard
temperature is to put some load on the CPU, and see which temperature
raises faster. A simple "md5sum /dev/zero" makes the trick.

> > > I am also pretty sure that VCore is wrong:
> >
> > It looks reasonable to me.
> 
> Nope, if I interpret it correctly
> http://lists.lm-sensors.org/pipermail/lm-sensors/2006-August/017356.html
> 
> has the same problem if you compare bios vcore and sensors output.

Yeah, there are interesting similarities between your report and this
one. Same motherboard manufacturer... I have had other reports for
IT8716F chips where the voltages were in line with what the BIOS said.
I wonder if these motherboards could be voluntarily underpowering all
the devices, instead of only the CPU, to same power? That would be
weird.

One way to test this is as follows:
Reboot your system, and make sure that the it87 driver will not be
loaded at boot time.
Dump the contents of the chip:
  isadump -y 0x295 0x296 > /tmp/before.dump
Load the it87 driver, run sensors once.
Dump the contents of the chip again:
  isadump -y 0x295 0x296 > /tmp/after.dump
Send both files here.

If the voltage registers in both dumps are the same, it means the it87
driver has nothing to do with it.

> > The decoding depends on the CPU. In theory the kernel detects it and
> > picks the right decoding formula but if your CPU is really new, it
> > might use a table we don't know yet. What is your exact CPU model?
> 
> cpu family      : 15
> model           : 75
> model name      : AMD Athlon(tm) 64 X2 Dual Core Processor 3800+
> stepping        : 2
> 
> It is the new AM2 "regular" version.

Do you know where I can get technical documentation for your
processor? My reference document for K8 CPUs was AMD document 30430 so
far, but I can't find your CPU revision there.

> > > CPU: 780
> > > POWER: 777
> > >
> > > wheres sensors reports too high values
> > > fan1:     1323 RPM  (min = 6490 RPM)                   ALARM
> > > fan2:        0 RPM  (min = 6490 RPM)                   ALARM
> > > fan3:     1564 RPM  (min =    0 RPM)
> >
> > So you are affected by the problem too...
> >
> > What do you think are the correct values for your fans, the BIOS' ones,
> > or sensors' ones?
> 
> I think the bios ones are right, as if I disable fan management, it shows CPU 
> fan at 2335 which fits well enough to Artcic Cooling Freezer 64 specs at 
> 2200rpm.

Almost all reporters seem to agree on that fact, and one ITE tech guy
just confirmed it to me... I'll fix the driver.

> (Yes my machine is "ultra silent", so it is possible that fans run 
> at ~800 rpm when idle. It also just consumes 50Watt when idle...)

Nice. I tried something similar for my home server, except that it's
using old hardware (Pentium III 800 MHz...) It is somewhere around 50 W
too, and pretty silent as well (mostly thanks to the Fortron PSU and the
Seagate hard disk drive.)

> On the other hand, when I disable fan management, the fan makes quite some 
> noise which might be too high for a 2200rpm fan, but maybe I am just used to 
> silence. ;-)

Depends on the size of the fan. A 120 mm fan at 2200 RPM should be
almost silent. A 60 mm fan at 2200 RPM can already make some noise,
although it should be acceptable.

> > > fan1:     46551 RPM  (min = 6490 RPM)                   ALARM
> > > fan2:        0 RPM  (min = 6490 RPM)                   ALARM
> > > fan3:     1551 RPM  (min =    0 RPM)
> >
> > Very strange. Are you using fan speed control? This could induce some
> > noise in the speed sensing.
> 
> Yes Asus' so called "q-fan2".

I guess you won't observe the phenomenon with it disabled.

> > Do you have similar effects when looking at 
> > the values in the BIOS?
> 
> Well, I haven't observed the bios long enough, as such values usually just 
> appear for short times. But I noticed at times the bios also shows wrong 
> values, as it shows "0" instead of ~800. Perhaps here the same thing hapens, 
> but the bios clips the value correctly?

I'm not sure about the "correctly" but yet the BIOS is most certainly
trimming the values it considers too high to be relistic. But I am
reluctant to do this in our drivers. It's up to the hardware to improve
to make it possible to control fans and still monitor them. I think
that's where we are going with 4-wire fans.

-- 
Jean Delvare

[lm-sensors] Asus M2NPV-VM and lm-sensors not working

[Prakash Punnoor]

Hi,

Am Freitag 25 August 2006 19:50 schrieb Jean Delvare:
> Hi Prakash,
>
> > I set them to:
> > powernow-k8:    0 : fid 0xc (2000 MHz), vid 0x11
> > powernow-k8:    1 : fid 0xa (1800 MHz), vid 0x13
> > powernow-k8:    2 : fid 0x2 (1000 MHz), vid 0x1b
>
> The K8 family uses the VID conversion table described in AMD document
> 26094 (Table 74). Inside the kernel it is known as VRM version "2.4.
> This table leads me to the following values:

Ah nice to know, thx!


> (2000 MHz), vid 0x11 -> 1.125 V
> (1800 MHz), vid 0x13 -> 1.075 V
> (1000 MHz), vid 0x1b -> 0.875 V
>
> These values are significantly lower than the ones I am used to (1.40
> V, 1.35 V and 1.10 V, respectively). I am surprised by your words: "I
> set them to"... Do you mean that you somehow _decided_ to use these
> values instead of the standard ones?

Yes, I used a hack with which I can override the default vids. Of course I did 
stability tests and ALU and FPU (->prime95) seems stable so far. (Using 
gentoo I would have nonoticed if the compiler creates junk. ;-) So, by your 
values given above, I have got a EE SFF version for the price of a regular 
one. :-)

> Please check that the value of /sys/class/hwmon/hwmon0/device/vrm is
> 8.2 as expected.

It gives 24.
>
> converting the values properly. This could be caused by a device
> misconfiguration, or maybe by the IT8716F chip itself being
> underpowered?

I don't think the chip is responsible for it, if I do it on purpose, or do you 
think it also causes some deviation?


> The driver should print some messages in the log when you load it, can
> you please copy them here?

it87: Found IT8716F chip at 0x290, revision 0
it87: in3 is VCC (+5V)
it87: in7 is VCCH (+5V)
it87: fan4 is enabled
it87: fan5 is enabled

Not too interesting, it seems, or is it?


> If temp2 is taken on the northbridge, and if you have no northbridge
> fan, and if your CPU is underpowered and has a good fan, it may make
> sense. I used to tell users that CPU temperature must always be above
> motherboard temperature, but I seem to be proven wrong more frequently.

> The best way to differenciate between CPU temperature and motherboard
> temperature is to put some load on the CPU, and see which temperature
> raises faster. A simple "md5sum /dev/zero" makes the trick.

Yes, I also concluded it this way, as the chipset is cooled passively and if I 
stress the CPU temp1 goes up fast and when going idle again, it goes down 
fast, as well. :-)


> Yeah, there are interesting similarities between your report and this
> one. Same motherboard manufacturer... I have had other reports for
> IT8716F chips where the voltages were in line with what the BIOS said.
> I wonder if these motherboards could be voluntarily underpowering all
> the devices, instead of only the CPU, to same power? That would be
> weird.
>
> One way to test this is as follows:
> Reboot your system, and make sure that the it87 driver will not be
> loaded at boot time.
> Dump the contents of the chip:
>   isadump -y 0x295 0x296 > /tmp/before.dump
> Load the it87 driver, run sensors once.
> Dump the contents of the chip again:
>   isadump -y 0x295 0x296 > /tmp/after.dump
> Send both files here.

Do you still want me to get the dumps, if you know now that I underpower on 
purpose?


> If the voltage registers in both dumps are the same, it means the it87
> driver has nothing to do with it.
>
> > > The decoding depends on the CPU. In theory the kernel detects it and
> > > picks the right decoding formula but if your CPU is really new, it
> > > might use a table we don't know yet. What is your exact CPU model?
> >
> > cpu family      : 15
> > model           : 75
> > model name      : AMD Athlon(tm) 64 X2 Dual Core Processor 3800+
> > stepping        : 2
> >
> > It is the new AM2 "regular" version.
>
> Do you know where I can get technical documentation for your
> processor? My reference document for K8 CPUs was AMD document 30430 so
> far, but I can't find your CPU revision there.
>
> > > > CPU: 780
> > > > POWER: 777
> > > >
> > > > wheres sensors reports too high values
> > > > fan1:     1323 RPM  (min = 6490 RPM)                   ALARM
> > > > fan2:        0 RPM  (min = 6490 RPM)                   ALARM
> > > > fan3:     1564 RPM  (min =    0 RPM)
> > >
> > > So you are affected by the problem too...
> > >
> > > What do you think are the correct values for your fans, the BIOS' ones,
> > > or sensors' ones?
> >
> > I think the bios ones are right, as if I disable fan management, it shows
> > CPU fan at 2335 which fits well enough to Artcic Cooling Freezer 64 specs
> > at 2200rpm.
>
> Almost all reporters seem to agree on that fact, and one ITE tech guy
> just confirmed it to me... I'll fix the driver.
>
> > (Yes my machine is "ultra silent", so it is possible that fans run
> > at ~800 rpm when idle. It also just consumes 50Watt when idle...)
>
> Nice. I tried something similar for my home server, except that it's
> using old hardware (Pentium III 800 MHz...) It is somewhere around 50 W
> too, and pretty silent as well (mostly thanks to the Fortron PSU and the
> Seagate hard disk drive.)
>
> > On the other hand, when I disable fan management, the fan makes quite
> > some noise which might be too high for a 2200rpm fan, but maybe I am just
> > used to silence. ;-)
>
> Depends on the size of the fan. A 120 mm fan at 2200 RPM should be
> almost silent. A 60 mm fan at 2200 RPM can already make some noise,
> although it should be acceptable.
>
> > > > fan1:     46551 RPM  (min = 6490 RPM)                   ALARM
> > > > fan2:        0 RPM  (min = 6490 RPM)                   ALARM
> > > > fan3:     1551 RPM  (min =    0 RPM)
> > >
> > > Very strange. Are you using fan speed control? This could induce some
> > > noise in the speed sensing.
> >
> > Yes Asus' so called "q-fan2".
>
> I guess you won't observe the phenomenon with it disabled.
>
> > > Do you have similar effects when looking at
> > > the values in the BIOS?
> >
> > Well, I haven't observed the bios long enough, as such values usually
> > just appear for short times. But I noticed at times the bios also shows
> > wrong values, as it shows "0" instead of ~800. Perhaps here the same
> > thing hapens, but the bios clips the value correctly?
>
> I'm not sure about the "correctly" but yet the BIOS is most certainly
> trimming the values it considers too high to be relistic. But I am
> reluctant to do this in our drivers. It's up to the hardware to improve
> to make it possible to control fans and still monitor them. I think
> that's where we are going with 4-wire fans.

-- 
(?=                 =?)
//\ Prakash Punnoor /\\
V_/                 \_V
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.lm-sensors.org/pipermail/lm-sensors/attachments/20060825/a1c7eef6/attachment.bin 

[lm-sensors] Asus M2NPV-VM and lm-sensors not working

[Jean Delvare]

> > Please check that the value of /sys/class/hwmon/hwmon0/device/vrm is
> > 8.2 as expected.
> 
> It gives 24.

Sorry, I don't know why I wrote "8.2", while I actually meant "24". So
it's OK :)

> > converting the values properly. This could be caused by a device
> > misconfiguration, or maybe by the IT8716F chip itself being
> > underpowered?
> 
> I don't think the chip is responsible for it, if I do it on purpose, or do you 
> think it also causes some deviation?

Depends on what you do exactly. If it is only supposed to affect the
CPU, the IT8716F chip shouldn't suffer from it.

> > The driver should print some messages in the log when you load it, can
> > you please copy them here?
> 
> it87: Found IT8716F chip at 0x290, revision 0
> it87: in3 is VCC (+5V)
> it87: in7 is VCCH (+5V)
> it87: fan4 is enabled
> it87: fan5 is enabled
> 
> Not too interesting, it seems, or is it?

It is, as it means VCC and VCCH are scaled internally. This means we
can't suspect different scaling resistors to explain the different
values between the BIOS and sensors.

> > One way to test this is as follows:
> > Reboot your system, and make sure that the it87 driver will not be
> > loaded at boot time.
> > Dump the contents of the chip:
> >   isadump -y 0x295 0x296 > /tmp/before.dump
> > Load the it87 driver, run sensors once.
> > Dump the contents of the chip again:
> >   isadump -y 0x295 0x296 > /tmp/after.dump
> > Send both files here.
> 
> Do you still want me to get the dumps, if you know now that I underpower on 
> purpose?

Well, the question is, do the voltage values reported by "sensors"
increase again if you stop underpowering your system? If they do,
obviously that's your business and I couldn't care less ;)

I generated a new version of my it87 patch, which should report fan
speeds properly:
  http://jdelvare.pck.nerim.net/sensors/hwmon-it8716f-it8718f-v3-2.6.18.patch
It also changes the low voltage limits to get rid of all the ALARMs.

-- 
Jean Delvare

[lm-sensors] Asus M2NPV-VM and lm-sensors not working

[Rudolf Marek]

Hi Prakash,

I will need your dsdt table for analysis too.
Please send me a a dsdt.bin file in private because mailing list will eat bin
attach.

cat /proc/acpi/dsdt > /tmp/dsdt.bin

Thanks,
Regards
Rudolf

[lm-sensors] Asus M2NPV-VM and lm-sensors not working

[Rudolf Marek]

Hi all,

Here are the results extracted from DSDT bytecode:

> 2) Some values are probably wrong:
> it8716-isa-0290
> Adapter: ISA adapter
> VCore:     +1.04 V  (min =  +4.08 V, max =  +4.08 V)   ALARM
> VDDR:      +3.12 V  (min =  +4.08 V, max =  +4.08 V)   ALARM
> +3.3V:     +0.00 V  (min =  +4.08 V, max =  +4.08 V)   ALARM
> +5V:       +4.84 V  (min =  +6.85 V, max =  +6.85 V)   ALARM
> +12V:     +11.46 V  (min = +16.32 V, max = +16.32 V)   ALARM
> in5:       +0.00 V  (min =  +4.08 V, max =  +4.08 V)   ALARM
> in6:       +0.00 V  (min =  +4.08 V, max =  +4.08 V)   ALARM
> 5VSB:      +4.70 V  (min =  +6.85 V, max =  +6.85 V)   ALARM
> VBat:      +2.86 V
> fan1:     1363 RPM  (min = 6490 RPM)                   ALARM
> fan2:        0 RPM  (min = 6490 RPM)                   ALARM
> fan3:     1566 RPM  (min =    0 RPM)
> temp1:       +26?C  (low  =    -1?C, high =    -1?C)   sensor = diode
> temp2:       +38?C  (low  =    -1?C, high =    -1?C)   sensor = thermistor
> temp3:       +25?C  (low  =    -1?C, high =    -1?C)   sensor = thermistor
> vid:       +0.00 V

                    Offset (0x20),
                    VCOR,   8,
                    V33V,   8,
                    Offset (0x23),
                    V50V,   8,
                    V12V,   8,


                Method (RVLT, 1, NotSerialized)
                {
                    Store (DerefOf (Index (VCRE, 0x00)), Local0)
	//if the user wants VCORE
                    If (LEqual (Arg0, Local0))
                    {
                        Store (VCOR, Local0)
	//READ VCORE reg 0x20
                        Store (0x00, Local1)
                        While (LEqual (Local0, 0xFF))
                        {
                            Store (VCOR, Local0)
                            If (LEqual (Local1, 0x000186A0))
                            {
                                Break
                            }
	
	//this loop is strange it tests if vcore_reg < 0xff (maybe >)
	//if so then read it again, if loop iteration is 0x000186A0 exit loop
	
                            Add (Local1, 0x01, Local1)
                        }

                        Multiply (Local0, 0x10, Local0)
                        Multiply (0x0F, 0x0A, Local1)
                        Add (Local1, Local0, Local0)
			
	//		VCORE = in1*16+150
			
                        Return (Local0)
                    }

                    Store (DerefOf (Index (V333, 0x00)), Local0)
                    If (LEqual (Arg0, Local0))
                    {
                        Store (V33V, Local0)
                        Store (0x00, Local1)
                        While (LEqual (Local0, 0xFF))
                        {
                            Store (V33V, Local0)
                            If (LEqual (Local1, 0x000186A0))
                            {
                                Break
                            }

                            Add (Local1, 0x01, Local1)
                        }
                        Multiply (Local0, 0x10, Local0)
	//V33V = in1 * 16
                        Return (Local0)
                    }

                    Store (DerefOf (Index (V500, 0x00)), Local0)
                    If (LEqual (Arg0, Local0))
                    {
                        Store (V50V, Local0)
                        Store (0x00, Local1)
                        While (LEqual (Local0, 0xFF))
                        {
                            Store (V50V, Local0)
                            If (LEqual (Local1, 0x000186A0))
                            {
                                Break
                            }

                            Add (Local1, 0x01, Local1)
                        }

                        Multiply (Local0, 0x10, Local0)
                        Store (0x22, Local1)
                        Store (0x32, Local2)
                        Add (Local1, Local2, Local1)
                        Multiply (Local0, Local1, Local0)
                        Divide (Local0, Local2, Local3, Local0)
                        Multiply (0x14, 0x0A, Local1)
                        Add (Local1, Local0, Local0)
	// 5V = (((in3 * 16) * (34 + 50)) / 50) + 34
                        Return (Local0)
                    }

                    Store (DerefOf (Index (V120, 0x00)), Local0)
                    If (LEqual (Arg0, Local0))
                    {
                        Store (V12V, Local0)
                        Store (0x00, Local1)
                        While (LEqual (Local0, 0xFF))
                        {
                            Store (V12V, Local0)
                            If (LEqual (Local1, 0x000186A0))
                            {
                                Break
                            }

                            Add (Local1, 0x01, Local1)
                        }

                        Multiply (Local0, 0x10, Local0)
                        Store (0x1E, Local1)
                        Store (0x0A, Local2)
                        Add (Local1, Local2, Local1)
                        Multiply (Local0, Local1, Local0)
                        Divide (Local0, Local2, Local3, Local0)
                        Multiply (0x28, 0x0A, Local1)
                        Add (Local1, Local0, Local0)
	// 12V = (((in4 * 16) * (30 + 10)) / 10) + 280
                        Return (Local0)
                    }

All in all they are adding small number to rise the numbers ;)
                }
I can find also formula for the fans if someone wants.

Regards
Rudolf

[lm-sensors] Asus M2NPV-VM and lm-sensors not working

[Jean Delvare]

Hi Rudolf,

> Here are the results extracted from DSDT bytecode:

Thanks for doing that :)

>                 Method (RVLT, 1, NotSerialized)
>                 {
>                     Store (DerefOf (Index (VCRE, 0x00)), Local0)
> 	//if the user wants VCORE
>                     If (LEqual (Arg0, Local0))
>                     {
>                         Store (VCOR, Local0)
> 	//READ VCORE reg 0x20
>                         Store (0x00, Local1)
>                         While (LEqual (Local0, 0xFF))
>                         {
>                             Store (VCOR, Local0)
>                             If (LEqual (Local1, 0x000186A0))
>                             {
>                                 Break
>                             }
> 	
> 	//this loop is strange it tests if vcore_reg < 0xff (maybe >)
> 	//if so then read it again, if loop iteration is 0x000186A0 exit loop
> 	
>                             Add (Local1, 0x01, Local1)
>                         }
> 
>                         Multiply (Local0, 0x10, Local0)
>                         Multiply (0x0F, 0x0A, Local1)
>                         Add (Local1, Local0, Local0)
> 			
> 	//		VCORE = in1*16+150

I guess you mean in0.

> 			
>                         Return (Local0)
>                     }
> 
>                     Store (DerefOf (Index (V333, 0x00)), Local0)
>                     If (LEqual (Arg0, Local0))
>                     {
>                         Store (V33V, Local0)
>                         Store (0x00, Local1)
>                         While (LEqual (Local0, 0xFF))
>                         {
>                             Store (V33V, Local0)
>                             If (LEqual (Local1, 0x000186A0))
>                             {
>                                 Break
>                             }
> 
>                             Add (Local1, 0x01, Local1)
>                         }
>                         Multiply (Local0, 0x10, Local0)
> 	//V33V = in1 * 16
>                         Return (Local0)
>                     }
> 
>                     Store (DerefOf (Index (V500, 0x00)), Local0)
>                     If (LEqual (Arg0, Local0))
>                     {
>                         Store (V50V, Local0)
>                         Store (0x00, Local1)
>                         While (LEqual (Local0, 0xFF))
>                         {
>                             Store (V50V, Local0)
>                             If (LEqual (Local1, 0x000186A0))
>                             {
>                                 Break
>                             }
> 
>                             Add (Local1, 0x01, Local1)
>                         }
> 
>                         Multiply (Local0, 0x10, Local0)
>                         Store (0x22, Local1)
>                         Store (0x32, Local2)
>                         Add (Local1, Local2, Local1)
>                         Multiply (Local0, Local1, Local0)
>                         Divide (Local0, Local2, Local3, Local0)
>                         Multiply (0x14, 0x0A, Local1)
>                         Add (Local1, Local0, Local0)
> 	// 5V = (((in3 * 16) * (34 + 50)) / 50) + 34
>                         Return (Local0)
>                     }

I think it's actually "+ 200" at the end?

I wonder why they compute these constants using multiply, rather than
puting the right value directly...

> 
>                     Store (DerefOf (Index (V120, 0x00)), Local0)
>                     If (LEqual (Arg0, Local0))
>                     {
>                         Store (V12V, Local0)
>                         Store (0x00, Local1)
>                         While (LEqual (Local0, 0xFF))
>                         {
>                             Store (V12V, Local0)
>                             If (LEqual (Local1, 0x000186A0))
>                             {
>                                 Break
>                             }
> 
>                             Add (Local1, 0x01, Local1)
>                         }
> 
>                         Multiply (Local0, 0x10, Local0)
>                         Store (0x1E, Local1)
>                         Store (0x0A, Local2)
>                         Add (Local1, Local2, Local1)
>                         Multiply (Local0, Local1, Local0)
>                         Divide (Local0, Local2, Local3, Local0)
>                         Multiply (0x28, 0x0A, Local1)
>                         Add (Local1, Local0, Local0)
> 	// 12V = (((in4 * 16) * (30 + 10)) / 10) + 280
>                         Return (Local0)
>                     }

And here I think it's "+ 400" at the end.

> All in all they are adding small number to rise the numbers ;)

Yeah, that's really weird. On the one hand, it looks completely broken
to do this, but on the other hand the readings are indeed better that
way. In particular, the battery voltage is really external to the
system, and the the 2.88V reported by the chip are rather low for a
brand new system, so it looks like the chip is not measuring the values
properly in the first place. I don't understand why. I've seen another
board (Asus too) where it works just fine.

Anyway, the driver does its job so there's nothing I can fix. It's up
to the system owner to adjust the voltages in sensors.conf to match the
BIOS ones if they want to.

> I can find also formula for the fans if someone wants.

I think we're OK with the fans now, thanks.

-- 
Jean Delvare

[lm-sensors] Asus M2NPV-VM and lm-sensors not working

[Prakash Punnoor]

Hi!

Arg, I actually wanted to continue writing my last email later, but pressed 
the send button by accident...

Am Freitag 25 August 2006 20:23 schrieb Jean Delvare:

> Well, the question is, do the voltage values reported by "sensors"
> increase again if you stop underpowering your system? If they do,
> obviously that's your business and I couldn't care less ;)

No they dont. eg:
VCore:     +1.23 V  (min =  +0.00 V, max =  +4.08 V)

Bios shows 1.35V, so clearly the voltages are off.

Here are the dumps:
cat before.dump
     0  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  a  b  c  d  e  f
00: 11 03 ff 07 00 00 00 00 00 80 7f 09 07 b7 ff 61
10: d0 d0 ff 73 d4 80 81 82 03 ff 03 00 00 ff ff ff
20: 3f c3 00 b4 b3 00 00 af b4 19 1f 19 4b 02 02 02
30: ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff
40: ff ff ff ff ff ff 00 0d 2d ff ff ff ff ff ff ff
50: ff 31 7f 7f 7f 50 f5 00 90 00 02 12 00 00 00 00
60: 00 19 7f 21 90 03 ff ff 14 19 48 21 90 03 ff ff
70: 7f 7f 7f 00 00 03 ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff
80: 00 00 00 00 ff ff ff ff 00 00 ff c0 02 00 99 99
90: 7f 7f 7f 00 00 7f ff ff 7f 7f 7f 00 00 7f ff ff
a0: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff
b0: ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff
c0: ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff
d0: ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff
e0: ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff
f0: ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff

cat after.dump
     0  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  a  b  c  d  e  f
00: 11 03 64 00 00 00 00 00 00 80 7f 09 07 a9 ff 61
10: d0 d0 ff 73 d4 80 81 82 03 ff 03 00 00 ff ff ff
20: 40 c3 00 b4 b3 00 00 af b4 1a 21 19 88 02 02 02
30: ff 00 ff 00 ff 00 ff 00 ff 00 ff 00 ff 00 ff 00
40: 7f ff 7f ff 7f ff 00 0d 2d ff ff ff ff ff ff ff
50: ff 31 7f 7f 7f 50 f5 00 90 00 02 12 00 00 00 00
60: 00 19 7f 21 90 03 ff ff 14 19 48 21 90 03 ff ff
70: 7f 7f 7f 00 00 03 ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff
80: 00 00 00 00 ff ff ff ff 00 00 ff c0 02 00 99 99
90: 7f 7f 7f 00 00 7f ff ff 7f 7f 7f 00 00 7f ff ff
a0: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff
b0: ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff
c0: ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff
d0: ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff
e0: ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff
f0: ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff


> I generated a new version of my it87 patch, which should report fan
> speeds properly:

Yes, looks better now. Maybe you want to lower the fan limits, as well?

fan1:      830 RPM  (min = 3245 RPM)                   ALARM
fan2:        0 RPM  (min = 3245 RPM)                   ALARM
fan3:      782 RPM  (min =    0 RPM)


> Do you know where I can get technical documentation for your
> processor? My reference document for K8 CPUs was AMD document 30430 so
> far, but I can't find your CPU revision there.

Actually I never searched for AMD docs, but in the AM2 section doc 33425 
refers to 31117 and 31119.

> Depends on the size of the fan. A 120 mm fan at 2200 RPM should be
> almost silent. A 60 mm fan at 2200 RPM can already make some noise,
> although it should be acceptable.

It is this one: http://www.arctic-cooling.com/cpu2.php?idx€&data=2&disc=, so 
the fan should be quite big, that's what makes me wonder.

> I'm not sure about the "correctly" but yet the BIOS is most certainly
> trimming the values it considers too high to be relistic. But I am
> reluctant to do this in our drivers. It's up to the hardware to improve
> to make it possible to control fans and still monitor them. I think
> that's where we are going with 4-wire fans

True, but I probably can'T fix the broken hw anymore. ;-)

Cheers,
-- 
(?=                 =?)
//\ Prakash Punnoor /\\
V_/                 \_V
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.lm-sensors.org/pipermail/lm-sensors/attachments/20060827/01f1dd2f/attachment.bin 

[lm-sensors] Asus M2NPV-VM and lm-sensors not working

[Jean Delvare]

Hi Prakash,

> > Well, the question is, do the voltage values reported by "sensors"
> > increase again if you stop underpowering your system? If they do,
> > obviously that's your business and I couldn't care less ;)
> 
> No they dont. eg:
> VCore:     +1.23 V  (min =  +0.00 V, max =  +4.08 V)
> 
> Bios shows 1.35V, so clearly the voltages are off.

We now have evidences that the BIOS adds arbitrary constants to the
measured voltages (150 mV for Vcore.) This explains the differences.
What we don't know is, why the BIOS does this. At any rate the driver
is correct and doesn't need to be fixed. You can add offsets in
sensors.conf to match the BIOS readings if you want.

> > I generated a new version of my it87 patch, which should report fan
> > speeds properly:
> 
> Yes, looks better now. Maybe you want to lower the fan limits, as well?
> 
> fan1:      830 RPM  (min = 3245 RPM)                   ALARM
> fan2:        0 RPM  (min = 3245 RPM)                   ALARM
> fan3:      782 RPM  (min =    0 RPM)

Aha, maybe _you_ want to lower the fan limits ;) Adjust the values in
sensors.conf and run "sensors -s" to apply the changes.

-- 
Jean Delvare

[lm-sensors] Asus M2NPV-VM and lm-sensors not working

[Prakash Punnoor]

Am Sonntag 27 August 2006 14:47 schrieb Jean Delvare:
> Hi Prakash,
>
> > > Well, the question is, do the voltage values reported by "sensors"
> > > increase again if you stop underpowering your system? If they do,
> > > obviously that's your business and I couldn't care less ;)
> >
> > No they dont. eg:
> > VCore:     +1.23 V  (min =  +0.00 V, max =  +4.08 V)
> >
> > Bios shows 1.35V, so clearly the voltages are off.
>
> We now have evidences that the BIOS adds arbitrary constants to the
> measured voltages (150 mV for Vcore.) This explains the differences.
> What we don't know is, why the BIOS does this. At any rate the driver
> is correct and doesn't need to be fixed. You can add offsets in
> sensors.conf to match the BIOS readings if you want.

Yes, I did it now:
    compute in0  @+0.15, @-0.15
    compute in1  @+0.1, @-0.1
    compute in3  ((6.8/10)+1)*@+0.2 , (@-0.2)/((6.8/10)+1)
    compute in4  ((30/10)+1)*@+0.4  , (@-0.4)/((30/10)+1)

Now the values match BIOS values. The only problem is I needed to adjust 
gkrellm by hand, as well...but at least now everything looks reasonable. :-)

> > > I generated a new version of my it87 patch, which should report fan
> > > speeds properly:
> >
> > Yes, looks better now. Maybe you want to lower the fan limits, as well?
> >
> > fan1:      830 RPM  (min = 3245 RPM)                   ALARM
> > fan2:        0 RPM  (min = 3245 RPM)                   ALARM
> > fan3:      782 RPM  (min =    0 RPM)
>
> Aha, maybe _you_ want to lower the fan limits ;) Adjust the values in
> sensors.conf and run "sensors -s" to apply the changes.

Ok, I did it now. :-)

Thanks again,
-- 
(?=                 =?)
//\ Prakash Punnoor /\\
V_/                 \_V
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.lm-sensors.org/pipermail/lm-sensors/attachments/20060827/dae1fb2b/attachment.bin