Metolious hardware-sensors-using-ACPI specs

Metolious hardware-sensors-using-ACPI specs

Post by Grover, Andre » Tue, 17 Dec 2002 20:30:07




> Is it goign to be implemented in linux-acpi?

> I took a look at specs at intel, and it has rather funny legaleese:

Wow, is that still on a website somewhere?

So as you may know from looking at the spec, Metolious was a spec that
defined a way for platforms to enumerate various motherboard sensors to the
OS, for manageability purposes.

It never took off, except for a couple companies that used the Windows
driver for other things because they didn't want to write a driver that
received ACPI device Notify()s.

The licensing may be weird, but given that there really is no point in
implementing it on Linux, does that really matter?

Regards -- Andy
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in

More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

 
 
 

Metolious hardware-sensors-using-ACPI specs

Post by PSI-System » Tue, 17 Dec 2002 20:40:10


Quote:> Wow, is that still on a website somewhere?

http://www.intel.com/design/servers/ipmi/metolious.htm
http://www.acpi.info/papers/Imple6/metolious.pdf
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in

More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

 
 
 

Metolious hardware-sensors-using-ACPI specs

Post by Pavel Mache » Wed, 18 Dec 2002 00:50:12


Hi!

Quote:> > Is it goign to be implemented in linux-acpi?

> > I took a look at specs at intel, and it has rather funny legaleese:

> Wow, is that still on a website somewhere?

Yep, as someone already pointed out.

Quote:> So as you may know from looking at the spec, Metolious was a spec that
> defined a way for platforms to enumerate various motherboard sensors to the
> OS, for manageability purposes.

> It never took off, except for a couple companies that used the Windows
> driver for other things because they didn't want to write a driver that
> received ACPI device Notify()s.
> The licensing may be weird, but given that there really is no point in
> implementing it on Linux, does that really matter?

Ouch, I started implementing that hour ago... [Never mind, very little
damage done so far].

But... Metolious sounds *needed*; how do you access voltage sensors
without metolious, in a way that can coexist with ACPI thermal
support?

                                                                Pavel
--
Casualities in World Trade Center: ~3k dead inside the building,
cryptography in U.S.A. and free speech in Czech Republic.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in

More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

 
 
 

Metolious hardware-sensors-using-ACPI specs

Post by Grover, Andre » Wed, 18 Dec 2002 01:10:05



> Ouch, I started implementing that hour ago... [Never mind, very little
> damage done so far].

Wow you work fast. ;-)

Quote:> But... Metolious sounds *needed*; how do you access voltage sensors
> without metolious, in a way that can coexist with ACPI thermal
> support?

(I think you mean thermal sensors)

A solution in search of a problem. I can say this because I helped define
it. :)

The machines that care about manageability (servers) appear to be entirely
disjoint from the ones that have thermal zones (and, servers use IPMI),
therefore thermal chip contention doesn't happen. And, Metolious required a
fair amount of AML code.

-- Andy
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in

More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

 
 
 

Metolious hardware-sensors-using-ACPI specs

Post by Pavel Mache » Wed, 18 Dec 2002 01:20:11


Hi!

Quote:> > But... Metolious sounds *needed*; how do you access voltage sensors
> > without metolious, in a way that can coexist with ACPI thermal
> > support?

> (I think you mean thermal sensors)

No, I mean voltage sensors. They are on same smbus as thermal sensors,
yet their are not normally accessible using ACPI. I can talk to smbus
controller directly, but acpi may decide to read temperature while I'm
reading voltage, leading to armagedon.

How is that solved?

Quote:> A solution in search of a problem. I can say this because I helped define
> it. :)

Well, I thought that "simple" specs looks reasonable, I did not look
at "advanced" metolious. But it seemed sane (*).

Quote:> The machines that care about manageability (servers) appear to be entirely
> disjoint from the ones that have thermal zones (and, servers use IPMI),
> therefore thermal chip contention doesn't happen. And, Metolious required a
> fair amount of AML code.

I have seen desktop machine that can control CPU fan (altrough it is
slow/fast not on/off) and has thermal zone. It would be nice to be
able to check voltages in a safe way...
                                                        Pavel

(*) comapred to ACPI2.0 ;-).
--
Casualities in World Trade Center: ~3k dead inside the building,
cryptography in U.S.A. and free speech in Czech Republic.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in

More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

 
 
 

Metolious hardware-sensors-using-ACPI specs

Post by Jirka Kosin » Wed, 18 Dec 2002 10:50:10



> The machines that care about manageability (servers) appear to be entirely
> disjoint from the ones that have thermal zones (and, servers use IPMI),

Talking about IPMI - is there anyone working on SMIC interface to IPMI
driver written by Corey Minyard? (http://home.attbi.com/~minyard). He
isn't working on it personally as he told me, because he doesn't have such
HW.

I've just downloaded specification from intel and can start working on it
after I finish my other projects, but I am asking firstly, to avoid
implementing it if someone is currently doing it.

--
JiKos.

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in

More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

 
 
 

1. using hardware sensors on MB 741LMRT

I'm experiencing some problems getting my hardware sensors to work (using
lm-sensors). I have a PCChips motherboard, model MB-741LMRT. This uses a
SiS 5595 b2/b3 chip.
This is the result of 'sensors':
sis5595-isa-0290
Adapter: ISA adapter
Algorithm: ISA algorithm
VCore 1:   +2.04 V  (min =  +2.84 V, max =  +3.45 V)   ALARM
VCore 2:   +1.98 V  (min =  +2.68 V, max =  +3.26 V)   ALARM
+3.3V:     +1.23 V  (min =  +2.97 V, max =  +3.63 V)   ALARM
+5V:       +0.91 V  (min =  +3.78 V, max =  +4.62 V)   ALARM
fan1:        0 RPM  (min = 3000 RPM, div = 2)          ALARM
fan2:        0 RPM  (min = 3000 RPM, div = 2)          ALARM
temp:     +127 C     (limit = +60 C,  hysteresis = +50 C) ALARM
alarms:   Board temperature input (usually LM75 chips) ALARM

Of course, the cpu is not really 127 , this is however the value that is
always showing up. Through the BIOS, correct temperatures can be seen at
bootup.

Anyone experience with this kind of MB/chip?

Thanks,

Frederik

2. Linux Frequently Asked Questions with Answers (Part 5 of 6)

3. CPU temperature monitoring: ACPI or lm-sensors?

4. XFree86 Config problem on ThinkPad 755CX

5. ACPI IRQ routing (was [ACPI] ACPI source release updated (200 11205))

6. rsh problems

7. Dell hardware sensors.

8. AnalogX Proxy / Loopback Error

9. asus a7m266-d smp mode hardware sensors

10. 865PE hardware sensors

11. Hardware sensors + A7N8X-X

12. Hardware Sensor KDE GUI Frontend

13. I2c with Hardware sensors and BT878/BT848 card