> >>One thing I have seen in all logs is the earlier "send_byte fail" message, so > >>I think that is a pre-requisite. > > > >Not necessarily - it could be that the patch actually fixes the root > >cause. One possible scenario is that on recent SMCs, some of the > >commands produce more data than we actually read. This would > >eventually lead to both data corruption and overflow somwhere in the > >SMC internals. If the original SMC error is interpreted as a read > >buffer overflow, then that problem should be fixed with this patch. > > > > Good point. > > But shouldn't we at least get the "flushed %d bytes" warning message in this case ? The explanation I have there is that the (newer) SMC needs the application to read the 'no more bytes' or it will get confused. It makes sense, if the number of bytes to read is no longer specified. Thanks, Henrik _______________________________________________ lm-sensors mailing list lm-sensors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors
