On Tue, Oct 01, 2013 at 09:33:13AM -0600, Chris Murphy wrote: > > On Oct 1, 2013, at 9:19 AM, Guenter Roeck <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Tue, Oct 01, 2013 at 12:55:26PM +0200, Henrik Rydberg wrote: > >>>> Warning message triggered with 3.12.0-0.rc3.git0.1.fc21.x86_64. > >>>> > >>>> [ 10.886016] applesmc: key count changed from 261 to 1174405121 > >>>> > >>> > >>> Explains the crash, but the new key count is very wrong. 1174405121 = 0x46000001. > >>> Which I guess explains the subsequent memory allocation error in the log. > >>> > >>> Henrik, any idea what might be going on ? Is it possible that the previous > >>> command failure leaves some state machine in a bad state ? > >> > >> I seem to recall a report on another similar state problem on newer > >> machines, so maybe, yes. Older machines seem fine, I have never > >> encountered the problem myself. Here is a patch to test that > >> theory. It has been tested to be pretty harmless on two different > >> generations. > >> > >> I really really do not want to add an 'if (value is insane)' check ;-) > >> > > Chris, > > > > any chance you can load this patch on an affected machine so we can get > > test feedback ? This one is too experimental to submit upstream without > > knowing that it really fixes the problem. > > Yes. What kernel.org source version should I apply it against? I'd use the non-debug config file from an equivalent version Fedora kernel, unless asked otherwise. And also should I test it on other vintages? I have here MBP4,1(2008); MBP8,2(2011), and MBP10,2(2012). > Only requirement is that it also includes the previous patch, so it would be optimal if you can apply it on top of the previous image. Thanks, Guenter _______________________________________________ lm-sensors mailing list lm-sensors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors
