From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gate.crashing.org (gate.crashing.org [63.228.1.57]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AE3952C0087 for ; Sun, 4 Aug 2013 12:20:32 +1000 (EST) Message-ID: <1375582816.15999.85.camel@pasglop> Subject: Re: windfarm_fcu_controls: cpu-pump-0 From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt To: Andreas Schwab Date: Sun, 04 Aug 2013 12:20:16 +1000 In-Reply-To: <87r4eahoka.fsf@igel.home> References: <87r4eb52s6.fsf@igel.home> <1375481448.15999.47.camel__48019.1930350431$1375481501$gmane$org@pasglop> <1375519493.15999.83.camel__49452.0221990117$1375519543$gmane$org@pasglop> <87r4eahoka.fsf@igel.home> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Mime-Version: 1.0 Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Sat, 2013-08-03 at 15:49 +0200, Andreas Schwab wrote: > Actually I see the same failure mask with the therm_pm72 driver, I > didn't notice since the driver ignores the return value from set_rpm_fan > and there is no sysfs file to monitor the cpu pumps. So it looks like > some real hardware fault? Either that, or the fault indication might be something to ignore on those machines, I don't know at this point. It might be worth trying to find another of these machines to compare. Maybe the water leaked out ? :-) Cheers, Ben. > > Andreas. >