* Re: [lm-sensors] ipmisensors almost working...
2007-10-05 7:53 [lm-sensors] ipmisensors almost working Stian Jordet
@ 2007-10-05 9:39 ` Jean Delvare
2007-10-05 11:11 ` Stian Jordet
` (7 subsequent siblings)
8 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Jean Delvare @ 2007-10-05 9:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: lm-sensors
Hi Stian,
On Fri, 05 Oct 2007 09:53:20 +0200, Stian Jordet wrote:
> after great help from Corey Minyard and Andrew Cress, I finally got
> ipmi_si working on my SC450NX system :)
>
> I'm now (trying) to use Yani Ioannou's ipmisensors module
> (http://bmcsensors-26.sourceforge.net). It's working, and I get mostly
> sensible values. But there are some problems.
>
> For instance, here is a output from sensors (from lm-sensors)
>
> bmc-isa-0003
> Adapter: ISA adapter
> SCSI-N Volt:
> +1.33 V (min = +0.00 V, max = +0.00 V)
> Baseboard 1.5V:
> +1.98 V (min = +0.00 V, max = +0.00 V)
> Baseboard 2.5V:
> +1.98 V (min = +0.00 V, max = +0.00 V)
> Baseboard 3.3V:
> +1.87 V (min = +0.00 V, max = +0.00 V)
> Baseboard 12V:
> +3.06 V (min = +0.00 V, max = +0.00 V)
> Baseboard 5V:
> +15.61 V (min = +0.00 V, max = +0.00 V)
> Baseboard -12V:
> +4.79 V (min = +0.00 V, max = +0.00 V)
> PwrShare Fan 3:
> 4740 RPM (min = 0 RPM)
> PwrShare Fan 2:
> 2610 RPM (min = 0 RPM)
> PwrShare Fan 1:
> 2520 RPM (min = 0 RPM)
> Baseboard Fan 6:
> 2640 RPM (min = 0 RPM)
> Baseboard Fan 7:
> 2700 RPM (min = 0 RPM)
> Baseboard Fan 8:
> 2850 RPM (min = 0 RPM)
> Baseboard Fan 5:
> 2910 RPM (min = 0 RPM)
> Baseboard Fan 3:
> 2730 RPM (min = 0 RPM)
> Baseboard Fan 4:
> 2970 RPM (min = 0 RPM)
> Baseboard Fan 1:
> 2730 RPM (min = 0 RPM)
> PwrShare Temp:
> -12.8 C (high = +0 C, hyst = +0 C)
> Processor 4 Temp:
> +61.0 C (high = +0 C, hyst = +0 C)
> Processor 3 Temp:
> +27.0 C (high = +0 C, hyst = +0 C)
> Processor 2 Temp:
> +27.0 C (high = +0 C, hyst = +0 C)
> Processor 1 Temp:
> +26.0 C (high = +0 C, hyst = +0 C)
> Basebrd PXB Temp:
> +26.0 C (high = +0 C, hyst = +0 C)
> Basebrd PCI Temp:
> +31.0 C (high = +0 C, hyst = +0 C)
>
> It mostly makes sense, except for the voltages and the PwrShare temp and
> Processor 4 temp. But when I disconnected the fan marked 4 on my system,
> the sensors command showed "Baseboard Fan 1: 0 RPM", while the command
> "ipmiutil sensor" correctly said that Baseboard Fan 4 had 0 rpm (or it
> actually said: 80000000.00 instead of the usual 80000182.00). I
> experimented a little more, and found this:
>
> ipmiutil sensor lm-sensors
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> Baseboard Fan 1 (not listed...)
> Baseboard Fan 2 SCSI-N Volt (!!!)
> Baseboard Fan 3 Baseboard Fan 4
> Baseboard Fan 4 Baseboard Fan 1
> Baseboard Fan 5 Baseboard Fan 3
> Baseboard Fan 6 Baseboard Fan 7
> Baseboard Fan 7 Baseboard Fan 8
> Baseboard Fan 8 Baseboard Fan 5
> PwrShare Fan 1 Baseboard Fan 6
> PwrShare Fan 2 PwrShare Fan 1
> PwrShare Fan 3 PwrShare Fan 2
>
>
> Because of obvious reasons, the fans were the only thing I could
> disconnect to see what would happen. Hard to do that with voltages and
> temperatures. The table means that when I disconnected baseboard fan 4
> (it's marked on the pcb), the command ipmiutil sensor shows me that
> baseboard fan 4 has 0 rpm. But the sensors command from lm-sensors
> (which uses the ipmisensors module) show that baseboard fan 1 has 0 rpm!
> And even stranger, when I disconnect Baseboard fan 2, lm-sensors says
> that my SCSI-N Volt is 0 volts! Obviously there must be some errors
> here. For instance, the PwrShare Temp looks very much like it should
> have been the Baseboard -12V sensor...
>
> I guess I'll have to hope Yani will look at this, but if someone else
> have an idea, I'd be very grateful!
Which version of lm-sensors have you been using for your test? Versions
from 2.9.1 to 2.10.4 (inclusive) are annoyingly shifting channel
numbers by one for bmc. This doesn't explain everything you observed,
but could still have interfered with your diagnostics. So I suggest
that you try either lm-sensors SVN (either the stable branch or the
upcoming 3.0 version):
http://dl.lm-sensors.org/lm-sensors/snapshots/lm-sensors-r4912-20071002.tar.bz2
http://dl.lm-sensors.org/lm-sensors-3/snapshots/lm-sensors-3-r4914-20071002.tar.bz2
--
Jean Delvare
_______________________________________________
lm-sensors mailing list
lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org
http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread* Re: [lm-sensors] ipmisensors almost working...
2007-10-05 7:53 [lm-sensors] ipmisensors almost working Stian Jordet
2007-10-05 9:39 ` Jean Delvare
@ 2007-10-05 11:11 ` Stian Jordet
2007-10-05 16:17 ` Yani Ioannou
` (6 subsequent siblings)
8 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Stian Jordet @ 2007-10-05 11:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: lm-sensors
Jean Delvare wrote:
> Which version of lm-sensors have you been using for your test? Versions
> from 2.9.1 to 2.10.4 (inclusive) are annoyingly shifting channel
> numbers by one for bmc. This doesn't explain everything you observed,
> but could still have interfered with your diagnostics. So I suggest
> that you try either lm-sensors SVN (either the stable branch or the
> upcoming 3.0 version):
> http://dl.lm-sensors.org/lm-sensors/snapshots/lm-sensors-r4912-20071002.tar.bz2
> http://dl.lm-sensors.org/lm-sensors-3/snapshots/lm-sensors-3-r4914-20071002.tar.bz2
>
Jean,
thanks for your reply :) I was using 2.10.4, but installed the snapshot
now. This is way beyond me, but I got a quite different result now:
bmc-isa-0003
Adapter: ISA adapter
SCSI-N Volt:
+1.33 V (min = +0.00 V, max = +0.00 V)
Baseboard 1.5V:
+1.98 V (min = +0.00 V, max = +0.00 V)
Baseboard 2.5V:
+1.89 V (min = +0.00 V, max = +0.00 V)
Baseboard 3.3V:
+3.06 V (min = +0.00 V, max = +0.00 V)
Baseboard 12V:
+15.68 V (min = +0.00 V, max = +0.00 V)
Baseboard 5V:
+4.79 V (min = +0.00 V, max = +0.00 V)
Baseboard -12V:
-12.11 V (min = +0.00 V, max = +0.00 V)
PwrShare Fan 3:
4680 RPM (min = 0 RPM)
PwrShare Fan 2:
2520 RPM (min = 0 RPM)
PwrShare Fan 1:
2520 RPM (min = 0 RPM)
Baseboard Fan 6:
2610 RPM (min = 0 RPM)
Baseboard Fan 7:
2730 RPM (min = 0 RPM)
Baseboard Fan 8:
2850 RPM (min = 0 RPM)
Baseboard Fan 5:
2880 RPM (min = 0 RPM)
Baseboard Fan 3:
2730 RPM (min = 0 RPM)
Baseboard Fan 4:
2970 RPM (min = 0 RPM)
Baseboard Fan 1:
2760 RPM (min = 0 RPM)
PwrShare Temp:
-12.8°C (high = +0°C, hyst = +0°C)
Processor 4 Temp:
+6.1°C (high = +0°C, hyst = +0°C)
Processor 3 Temp:
+2.6°C (high = +0°C, hyst = +0°C)
Processor 2 Temp:
+2.6°C (high = +0°C, hyst = +0°C)
Processor 1 Temp:
+2.5°C (high = +0°C, hyst = +0°C)
Basebrd PXB Temp:
+2.4°C (high = +0°C, hyst = +0°C)
Basebrd PCI Temp:
+3.0°C (high = +0°C, hyst = +0°C)
The voltages looks a little better (Probably still wrong, but I have no
idea), but the temperatures were better earlier ;) But that might be
another bug in lm-sensors with regard to bmc? Or is that an ipmisensors
workaround to get past a lm-sensors bug that is now fixed?
I'll have to wait untill I'm back home to see if each sensor now
corresponds to the right label in lm-sensors.
Thanks for the help :)
Regards,
Stian
_______________________________________________
lm-sensors mailing list
lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org
http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread* Re: [lm-sensors] ipmisensors almost working...
2007-10-05 7:53 [lm-sensors] ipmisensors almost working Stian Jordet
2007-10-05 9:39 ` Jean Delvare
2007-10-05 11:11 ` Stian Jordet
@ 2007-10-05 16:17 ` Yani Ioannou
2007-10-05 16:40 ` Stian Jordet
` (5 subsequent siblings)
8 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Yani Ioannou @ 2007-10-05 16:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: lm-sensors
Hi Stian,
The reason I haven't merged ipmisensors into the kernel yet is this
exactly, on some BMCs the code to convert sensor readings into human
readable forms is just not working - this is practically the only code
left over from bmcsensors and I began re-writing it a few months ago
but got busy with other stuff. I'd like to start that again though, so
perhaps you could help ne test the new code when it is finished?
There are in fact some sensors we may never be able to convert
completely in the kernel - they require complex transformations
involving logarithms. etc, that kernel code simply can't (and
shouldn't) calculate, so I think the real solution to this will have
to involve userspace support.
For now could you list the results from lmsensors and ipmitool so they
can be compared?
Thanks,
Yani
_______________________________________________
lm-sensors mailing list
lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org
http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread* Re: [lm-sensors] ipmisensors almost working...
2007-10-05 7:53 [lm-sensors] ipmisensors almost working Stian Jordet
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2007-10-05 16:17 ` Yani Ioannou
@ 2007-10-05 16:40 ` Stian Jordet
2007-10-05 19:13 ` Stian Jordet
` (4 subsequent siblings)
8 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Stian Jordet @ 2007-10-05 16:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: lm-sensors
On fre, 2007-10-05 at 12:17 -0400, Yani Ioannou wrote:
> Hi Stian,
>
> The reason I haven't merged ipmisensors into the kernel yet is this
> exactly, on some BMCs the code to convert sensor readings into human
> readable forms is just not working - this is practically the only code
> left over from bmcsensors and I began re-writing it a few months ago
> but got busy with other stuff. I'd like to start that again though, so
> perhaps you could help ne test the new code when it is finished?
>
> There are in fact some sensors we may never be able to convert
> completely in the kernel - they require complex transformations
> involving logarithms. etc, that kernel code simply can't (and
> shouldn't) calculate, so I think the real solution to this will have
> to involve userspace support.
> For now could you list the results from lmsensors and ipmitool so they
> can be compared?
Yani,
I see. I would very much like to test new code :) I'm now running a
lm-sensors svn snapshot from yesterday, after Jean Delvare said that
there was an bug in the earlier lm-sensors causing sensor channel
numbers to be shifted. Upgrading to latest svn snapshot made my voltages
look better (but still not good), while all but one temperature got
divided by 10 (!).
ipmitool doesn't work, I guess because my board only supports IPMI 0.9.
But ipmiutil somehow works (partly). I cuts some of the sensor names,
and doesn't give human readable values, but when I for instance remove a
fan, the value changes to 0000 at the end. (And the name of the fan is
the same as the name on the pcb where I unplug it (same goes with
PSU's), so it surely makes some sense).
This is from lm-sensors:
bmc-isa-0003
Adapter: ISA adapter
SCSI-N Volt:
+1.33 V (min = +0.00 V, max = +0.00 V)
Baseboard 1.5V:
+1.98 V (min = +0.00 V, max = +0.00 V)
Baseboard 2.5V:
+1.87 V (min = +0.00 V, max = +0.00 V)
Baseboard 3.3V:
+3.06 V (min = +0.00 V, max = +0.00 V)
Baseboard 12V:
+15.68 V (min = +0.00 V, max = +0.00 V)
Baseboard 5V:
+4.79 V (min = +0.00 V, max = +0.00 V)
Baseboard -12V:
-12.11 V (min = +0.00 V, max = +0.00 V)
PwrShare Fan 3:
4740 RPM (min = 0 RPM)
PwrShare Fan 2:
2550 RPM (min = 0 RPM)
PwrShare Fan 1:
2550 RPM (min = 0 RPM)
Baseboard Fan 6:
2610 RPM (min = 0 RPM)
Baseboard Fan 7:
2730 RPM (min = 0 RPM)
Baseboard Fan 8:
2850 RPM (min = 0 RPM)
Baseboard Fan 5:
2880 RPM (min = 0 RPM)
Baseboard Fan 3:
2730 RPM (min = 0 RPM)
Baseboard Fan 4:
3000 RPM (min = 0 RPM)
Baseboard Fan 1:
2760 RPM (min = 0 RPM)
PwrShare Temp:
-12.8 C (high = +0 C, hyst = +0 C)
Processor 4 Temp:
+6.1 C (high = +0 C, hyst = +0 C)
Processor 3 Temp:
+2.6 C (high = +0 C, hyst = +0 C)
Processor 2 Temp:
+2.7 C (high = +0 C, hyst = +0 C)
Processor 1 Temp:
+2.5 C (high = +0 C, hyst = +0 C)
Basebrd PXB Temp:
+2.5 C (high = +0 C, hyst = +0 C)
Basebrd PCI Temp:
+3.1 C (high = +0 C, hyst = +0 C)
And here is the ipmiutil sensor output. As you can see, the "comp"
sensors gets their name cut. But ipmisensors can read the whole name,
like: ipmisensors: skipping non-threshold sensor "PwrShare Sup 1"
ipmiutil ver 2.0
sensor: version 1.59
-- BMC version 0.35, IPMI version 0.1
_ID_ SDR_Type_xx Sz Own Typ S_Num Sens_Description Hex & Interp Reading
0020 SDR Full 01 39 20 a f8 snum 04 Baseboard -12V = 6a OK* 2520000212.00 unspecified
4020 SDR Full 01 3b 20 a f8 snum 14 Basebrd PCI Temp = 9a OK* 2360079156.00 unspecified
8020 SDR Full 01 3b 20 a f8 snum 15 Basebrd PXB Temp = 9f OK* 2360081726.00 unspecified
c020 SDR Full 01 3b 20 a f8 snum 16 Processor 1 Temp = 99 OK* 2360078642.00 unspecified
0021 SDR Full 01 3b 20 a f8 snum 17 Processor 2 Temp = 99 OK* 2360078642.00 unspecified
4021 SDR Full 01 3b 20 a f8 snum 18 Processor 3 Temp = a1 OK* 2360082754.00 unspecified
8021 SDR Full 01 3b 20 a f8 snum 19 Processor 4 Temp = 9b OK* 2360079670.00 unspecified
c021 SDR Full 01 37 20 a f8 snum 01 Baseboard 5V = bd OK* 440012474.00 unspecified
0022 SDR Full 01 38 20 a f8 snum 02 Baseboard 12V = ab OK* 440000342.00 unspecified
4022 SDR Full 01 39 20 a f8 snum 03 Baseboard 3.3V = df OK* 440000446.00 unspecified
8022 SDR Full 01 39 20 a f8 snum 0c Baseboard 2.5V = cb OK* 440000406.00 unspecified
c022 SDR Full 01 39 20 a f8 snum 0b Baseboard 1.5V = 9b OK* 440000310.00 unspecified
0023 SDR Full 01 36 20 a f8 snum 13 SCSI-N Volt = ca OK* 440000404.00 unspecified
4023 SDR Full 01 3a 20 a f8 snum 1a Baseboard Fan 2 = 5e OK* 80000188.00 unspecified
8023 SDR Full 01 3a 20 a f8 snum 1b Baseboard Fan 1 = 63 OK* 80000198.00 unspecified
c023 SDR Full 01 3a 20 a f8 snum 1c Baseboard Fan 4 = 5b OK* 80000182.00 unspecified
0024 SDR Full 01 3a 20 a f8 snum 1d Baseboard Fan 3 = 63 OK* 80000198.00 unspecified
4024 SDR Full 01 3a 20 a f8 snum 1e Baseboard Fan 5 = 5c OK* 80000184.00 unspecified
8024 SDR Full 01 3a 20 a f8 snum 1f Baseboard Fan 8 = 60 OK* 80000192.00 unspecified
c024 SDR Full 01 3a 20 a f8 snum 20 Baseboard Fan 7 = 5f OK* 80000190.00 unspecified
0025 SDR Full 01 3a 20 a f8 snum 21 Baseboard Fan 6 = 5b OK* 80000182.00 unspecified
4025 SDR Full 01 39 20 a f8 snum 22 PwrShare Fan 1 = 57 OK* 80000174.00 unspecified
8025 SDR Full 01 39 20 a f8 snum 23 PwrShare Fan 2 = 55 OK* 80000170.00 unspecified
c025 SDR Full 01 39 20 a f8 snum 24 PwrShare Fan 3 = 55 OK* 80000170.00 unspecified
0026 SDR Full 01 38 20 a f8 snum 2d PwrShare Temp = 9e OK* 2360081212.00 unspecified
4026 SDR Comp 02 25 20 a 49 snum 2c 3-4 L2 VID = c0 c0 fb b7 Deassert
7026 SDR Comp 02 25 20 a 49 snum 2b 1-2 L2 VID = c0 00 00 00 OK
a026 SDR Comp 02 22 20 a 49 snum 31 oc Term = c0 00 00 00 OK
d026 SDR Comp 02 26 20 a 09 snum 27 ssor 1 Stat = 80 80 00 00 Enabled
0027 SDR Comp 02 26 20 a 09 snum 28 ssor 2 Stat = 80 80 00 00 Enabled
3027 SDR Comp 02 26 20 a 09 snum 29 ssor 3 Stat = 80 80 00 00 Enabled
6027 SDR Comp 02 26 20 a 09 snum 2a ssor 4 Stat = 80 80 00 00 Enabled
9027 SDR Comp 02 25 20 a 49 snum 25 edund Lost = 00 80 00 00 OK
c027 SDR Comp 02 20 20 a 09 snum 26 Unit = 00 00 00 00 NotAvailable
f027 SDR Comp 02 24 20 a 49 snum 32 Post Code = c0 00 00 00 OK
2028 SDR Comp 02 26 20 a 49 snum 41 MP Password = c0 00 00 00 OK
5028 SDR Comp 02 26 20 a 49 snum 33 ntrusion ID = c1 00 00 00 OK
8028 SDR Comp 02 24 20 a 49 snum 36 rtPnl NMI = 00 80 00 00 OK
b028 SDR Comp 02 22 20 a 49 snum 37 atchdog = 00 80 00 00 OK
e028 SDR Comp 02 25 20 a 49 snum 34 Violation = c0 00 00 00 OK
1029 SDR Comp 02 1f 20 a 43 snum 35 tate = c0 00 00 00 OK
4029 SDR Comp 02 24 20 a 49 snum 2e are Sup 1 = 01 80 00 00 OK
7029 SDR Comp 02 24 20 a 49 snum 2f are Sup 2 = 01 80 00 00 OK
a029 SDR Comp 02 24 20 a 49 snum 30 are Sup 3 = 01 80 00 00 OK
d029 SDR Comp 02 1f 20 a 49 snum 38 tate = c0 00 00 00 OK
002a SDR Comp 02 26 20 a 49 snum 0d Term Vlt A1 = c0 00 00 00 OK
302a SDR Comp 02 26 20 a 49 snum 0e Term Vlt A2 = c0 00 00 00 OK
602a SDR Comp 02 26 20 a 49 snum 0f Term Vlt A3 = c0 00 00 00 OK
902a SDR Comp 02 26 20 a 49 snum 10 Term Vlt B1 = c0 00 00 00 OK
c02a SDR Comp 02 26 20 a 49 snum 11 Term Vlt B2 = c0 00 00 00 OK
f02a SDR Comp 02 26 20 a 49 snum 12 Term Vlt B3 = c0 00 00 00 OK
202b SDR Comp 02 24 c0 a 49 snum 01 rv Status = bc c0 00 00 OK
502b SDR Comp 02 26 c0 a 49 snum 07 rv Presence = 00 00 00 00 NotAvailable
802b SDR DLoc 10 1b dev: 20 00 00 05 00 bd Basbrd Mgmt Ctlr
a02b SDR DLoc 10 1a dev: ae 50 00 20 08 00 Processor 1 FRU
c02b SDR DLoc 10 1a dev: aa 50 00 20 08 00 Processor 2 FRU
e02b SDR DLoc 10 1a dev: a6 50 00 20 08 00 Processor 3 FRU
002c SDR DLoc 10 1a dev: a2 50 00 20 08 00 Processor 4 FRU
202c SDR DLoc 10 17 dev: d0 40 00 20 09 02 PwrShare FRU
402c SDR DLoc 10 18 dev: c0 00 00 02 00 85 Hot Swap Ctlr
602c SDR DLoc 10 1b dev: aa 40 00 20 09 02 Memory Board FRU
802c SDR DLoc 10 1b dev: d2 40 00 20 09 02 Pwr Supply 1 FRU
a02c SDR DLoc 10 1b dev: d4 40 00 20 09 02 Pwr Supply 2 FRU
c02c SDR DLoc 10 1b dev: d6 40 00 20 09 02 Pwr Supply 3 FRU
e02c SDR OEM c0 10 manufS91443: 20 56 65 72 73 69 6f 6e 20 31 2e 33 37
sensor: completed successfully
If you feel very interested, and it would help you, you can get access to this system for debug and/or testing.
Thanks for a great module, and hopefully you will with time get this working as well ;)
Really appreciated!
-Stian
_______________________________________________
lm-sensors mailing list
lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org
http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread* Re: [lm-sensors] ipmisensors almost working...
2007-10-05 7:53 [lm-sensors] ipmisensors almost working Stian Jordet
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2007-10-05 16:40 ` Stian Jordet
@ 2007-10-05 19:13 ` Stian Jordet
2007-10-05 20:08 ` Jean Delvare
` (3 subsequent siblings)
8 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Stian Jordet @ 2007-10-05 19:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: lm-sensors
On fre, 2007-10-05 at 13:11 +0200, Stian Jordet wrote:
> The voltages looks a little better (Probably still wrong, but I have no
> idea), but the temperatures were better earlier ;) But that might be
> another bug in lm-sensors with regard to bmc? Or is that an ipmisensors
> workaround to get past a lm-sensors bug that is now fixed?
>
> I'll have to wait untill I'm back home to see if each sensor now
> corresponds to the right label in lm-sensors.
Hmm. I have now tested a little. The Voltages seems much better, but the
fans are off excactly the same as with the old version. Is it possible
that whatever fix you did only affected voltages? While it should have
fixed also temperatures and fans? Because the fans were absolutely
unaffected by the upgrade, and temperatures were excactly the same, but
divided by 10.
Looking at the source, it seems the only error was with voltages, so
that doesn't seem to be the problem. Weird.
I guess I (still) hope that Yani will figure it out.
Thanks for the tip, though :)
Regards,
Stian
_______________________________________________
lm-sensors mailing list
lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org
http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread* Re: [lm-sensors] ipmisensors almost working...
2007-10-05 7:53 [lm-sensors] ipmisensors almost working Stian Jordet
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2007-10-05 19:13 ` Stian Jordet
@ 2007-10-05 20:08 ` Jean Delvare
2007-10-07 8:25 ` Jean Delvare
` (2 subsequent siblings)
8 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Jean Delvare @ 2007-10-05 20:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: lm-sensors
Hi Stian, Yani,
On Fri, 05 Oct 2007 18:40:22 +0200, Stian Jordet wrote:
> On fre, 2007-10-05 at 12:17 -0400, Yani Ioannou wrote:
> > There are in fact some sensors we may never be able to convert
> > completely in the kernel - they require complex transformations
> > involving logarithms. etc, that kernel code simply can't (and
> > shouldn't) calculate, so I think the real solution to this will have
> > to involve userspace support.
Yes, this is what we do for other drivers too. Arbitrary computation
formulae can be attached to all measurement channels in libsensors,
with support for logarithm and exponential. So it's really only a
matter of writing the right configuration file for your system.
> (...)
> I see. I would very much like to test new code :) I'm now running a
> lm-sensors svn snapshot from yesterday, after Jean Delvare said that
> there was an bug in the earlier lm-sensors causing sensor channel
> numbers to be shifted. Upgrading to latest svn snapshot made my voltages
> look better (but still not good), while all but one temperature got
> divided by 10 (!).
Ah, yes. The sysfs interface standard in Linux 2.6 states that
temperatures are exported in 10^-3 degrees C, while I seem to remember
that the ipmisensors driver exports the values in 10-^2 degrees C (as
was done in Linux 2.4). There was a hack in libsensors to deal with
this deviation from the standard, which I removed while fixing the
indexing issue. So ipmisensors will have to be fixed to stick to the
standard interface.
--
Jean Delvare
_______________________________________________
lm-sensors mailing list
lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org
http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread* Re: [lm-sensors] ipmisensors almost working...
2007-10-05 7:53 [lm-sensors] ipmisensors almost working Stian Jordet
` (5 preceding siblings ...)
2007-10-05 20:08 ` Jean Delvare
@ 2007-10-07 8:25 ` Jean Delvare
2007-10-07 14:14 ` Yani Ioannou
2008-07-15 11:58 ` Stian Jordet
8 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Jean Delvare @ 2007-10-07 8:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: lm-sensors
Hi Stian,
On Fri, 05 Oct 2007 21:13:37 +0200, Stian Jordet wrote:
> On fre, 2007-10-05 at 13:11 +0200, Stian Jordet wrote:
> > The voltages looks a little better (Probably still wrong, but I have no
> > idea), but the temperatures were better earlier ;) But that might be
> > another bug in lm-sensors with regard to bmc? Or is that an ipmisensors
> > workaround to get past a lm-sensors bug that is now fixed?
> >
> > I'll have to wait untill I'm back home to see if each sensor now
> > corresponds to the right label in lm-sensors.
>
> Hmm. I have now tested a little. The Voltages seems much better, but the
> fans are off excactly the same as with the old version. Is it possible
> that whatever fix you did only affected voltages? While it should have
> fixed also temperatures and fans? Because the fans were absolutely
> unaffected by the upgrade, and temperatures were excactly the same, but
> divided by 10.
>
> Looking at the source, it seems the only error was with voltages, so
> that doesn't seem to be the problem. Weird.
The fix indeed didn't affect the fans, only the voltages and the
temperatures, because the fan support was already OK in libsensors.
Most voltage channels were shifted by one, and most temperature
channels were not using the standard magnitude.
--
Jean Delvare
_______________________________________________
lm-sensors mailing list
lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org
http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread* Re: [lm-sensors] ipmisensors almost working...
2007-10-05 7:53 [lm-sensors] ipmisensors almost working Stian Jordet
` (6 preceding siblings ...)
2007-10-07 8:25 ` Jean Delvare
@ 2007-10-07 14:14 ` Yani Ioannou
2008-07-15 11:58 ` Stian Jordet
8 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Yani Ioannou @ 2007-10-07 14:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: lm-sensors
On 10/5/07, Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org> wrote:
> Ah, yes. The sysfs interface standard in Linux 2.6 states that
> temperatures are exported in 10^-3 degrees C, while I seem to remember
> that the ipmisensors driver exports the values in 10-^2 degrees C (as
> was done in Linux 2.4). There was a hack in libsensors to deal with
> this deviation from the standard, which I removed while fixing the
> indexing issue. So ipmisensors will have to be fixed to stick to the
> standard interface.
Oops, good to know, I can change that. :)
Yani
_______________________________________________
lm-sensors mailing list
lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org
http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread* Re: [lm-sensors] ipmisensors almost working...
2007-10-05 7:53 [lm-sensors] ipmisensors almost working Stian Jordet
` (7 preceding siblings ...)
2007-10-07 14:14 ` Yani Ioannou
@ 2008-07-15 11:58 ` Stian Jordet
8 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Stian Jordet @ 2008-07-15 11:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: lm-sensors
Yani Ioannou skrev:
> Hi Stian,
>
> The reason I haven't merged ipmisensors into the kernel yet is this
> exactly, on some BMCs the code to convert sensor readings into human
> readable forms is just not working - this is practically the only code
> left over from bmcsensors and I began re-writing it a few months ago
> but got busy with other stuff. I'd like to start that again though, so
> perhaps you could help ne test the new code when it is finished?
>
> There are in fact some sensors we may never be able to convert
> completely in the kernel - they require complex transformations
> involving logarithms. etc, that kernel code simply can't (and
> shouldn't) calculate, so I think the real solution to this will have
> to involve userspace support.
> For now could you list the results from lmsensors and ipmitool so they
> can be compared?
>
Hi, Yani.
I guess you have given up/lost interest in this project. But I still
wanted to give it a shot and hear if you were planning trying to make it
work one last time ;)
Have a nice summer!
Regards,
Stian
_______________________________________________
lm-sensors mailing list
lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org
http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread