I was able to build i2c-ipmi (with modification) and then load it, but like I said I can't detect any sensors. I read the FAQ, the documentation on i2c-ipmi and adm1026, and some docs on IPMI, but I still can't figure out why it's not detecting anything. It feels like I'm boldly going where nobody has gone before. That's perhaps understandable, as there aren't many people with Itanium systems, and even fewer running Linux on them and even fewer of those who would be interested in hardware monitoring. If you tell me it just can't be done, at least not yet, then I'll move on to something else. I've had good luck with lm_sensors on my other motherboards, though, so I'm hopeful that I can get this to work too. I'm happy to try experimental versions, send debugging output, etc., but right now I'm stuck and don't know what to try next. Thanks for your help. > -----Original Message----- > From: Mark Studebaker [mailto:mds4 at verizon.net] > Sent: Monday, March 08, 2004 7:22 PM > To: Marc Rieffel > Cc: LM Sensors > Subject: Re: lm_sensors vs. IPMI > > > As I said in my previous mail, i2c-ipmb is broken. You can > either remove it from Module.mk > or just use 'make -k' to keep going. > See doc/chips and doc/busses for documentation on the modules. > > Marc Rieffel wrote: > > When I set the priority to zero in both i2c-ipmi.c and > i2c-ipbm.c, those modules compile, install, and load fine. > But sensors-detect doesn't detect anything and manually > loading adm1026 succeeds but shows no sensors. Can you point > me towards more documentation on how to use the i2c-ipm* > modules or suggest what I should try next? > > > > Thanks. > > > > > >>-----Original Message----- > >>From: Mark Studebaker [mailto:mds4 at verizon.net] > >>Sent: Thursday, March 04, 2004 6:30 PM > >>To: Marc Rieffel > >>Cc: LM Sensors > >>Subject: Re: lm_sensors vs. IPMI > >> > >> > >>I can elaborate. > >> > >>Our modules bmcsensors and i2c-ipmi, together, connect the > >>lm-sensors userspace tools to IPMI, > >>so that you can do the usual things you can do with > >>lm-senssors (see temperatures, voltages, and fan speeds, > >>set limits, and see alarms). If this is what you need, > >>lm-sensors will do it. > >> > >>IPMI is a quite sophisticated interface, and it is capable of > >>much more than what > >>is available through the lm-sensors interface (for example, > >>event logging). > >> > >>I'm sure there are many other programs available to use IPMI. > >>Some of these certainly > >>will expose more of the richness of IPMI. > >> > >>The third module is i2c-ipmb. This was meant to export the > >>raw i2c busses behind the > >>BMC controller to the kernel. You could make the argument > >>that this isn't a good idea. > >>But in any case, the BMC I have doesn't support the messages > >>required for i2c-ipmb, > >>so I never got it working. > >> > >>To the extent that board makers are adding BMC controllers to > >>boards, and putting > >>the hardware monitors behind the BMC, this makes the direct > >>hardware monitor drivers > >>that make up the bulk of lm-sensors unnecessary. In that > >>case, you must use IPMI. > >>But you still need additional modules and/or userspace apps > >>that talk IPMI to get > >>the data out. That's where you are welcome to try our solution > >>(sensors->libsensors->bmcsensors->i2c-ipmi->IPMI->BMC->the chips) > >>or another program on top of IPMI. > >> > >>Hope this helps. > >>Give our package a try if you like. > >> > >>mds > >> > >> > >> > >>Jean Delvare wrote: > >> > >>>>I've seen several postings claiming that lm_sensors is out > >> > >>and IPMI is > >> > >>>>in. Do they serve the same purpose? I played with IPMI a > >> > >>few months > >> > >>>>back and never got anything out of it. > >>> > >>> > >>>I admit my relative ignorance in that domain. Yes, I think > >> > >>they serve > >> > >>>the same purposes. I think we even have a non-working ipmi > >> > >>driver that > >> > >>>is supposed to establish a bridge between both realms. > >> > >>Never gave it a > >> > >>>try so far, however, since I don't have any hardware using > >> > >>this. I guess > >> > >>>it's meant for relatively high-end servers only. > >>> > >> > > > > > >
