lm_sensors is lacking infos

battosai147 · 2018-01-25 21:37:00

Hello,

im having some troubles with lm_sensors. Here is my output of 'sensors':

[user@host ~]$ sensors
coretemp-isa-0000
Adapter: ISA adapter
Package id 0:  +50.0°C  (high = +100.0°C, crit = +100.0°C)
Core 0:        +48.0°C  (high = +100.0°C, crit = +100.0°C)
Core 1:        +49.0°C  (high = +100.0°C, crit = +100.0°C)

pch_skylake-virtual-0
Adapter: Virtual device
temp1:        +48.5°C  

thinkpad-isa-0000
Adapter: ISA adapter
fan1:        2554 RPM

iwlwifi-virtual-0
Adapter: Virtual device
temp1:        +46.0°C  

acpitz-virtual-0
Adapter: Virtual device
temp1:        +49.0°C  (crit = +98.0°C)

whereas I'm expecting an output like this:

[reducted_user@reducted_host ~]$ sensors
acpitz-virtual-0
Adapter: Virtual device
temp1:       +30.0°C  (crit = +80.0°C)                  

coretemp-isa-0000
Adapter: ISA adapter
Core 0:      +36.0°C  (high = +78.0°C, crit = +100.0°C)  

coretemp-isa-0001
Adapter: ISA adapter
Core 1:      +34.0°C  (high = +78.0°C, crit = +100.0°C)  

w83627dhg-isa-0290
Adapter: ISA adapter
Vcore:       +1.12 V  (min =  +0.00 V, max =  +1.74 V)   
in1:         +0.91 V  (min =  +0.51 V, max =  +0.21 V)   ALARM
AVCC:        +3.30 V  (min =  +2.98 V, max =  +3.63 V)   
VCC:         +3.30 V  (min =  +2.98 V, max =  +3.63 V)   
in4:         +1.10 V  (min =  +0.00 V, max =  +0.14 V)   ALARM
in5:         +1.20 V  (min =  +0.13 V, max =  +0.00 V)   ALARM
in6:         +1.58 V  (min =  +0.02 V, max =  +0.00 V)   ALARM
3VSB:        +3.23 V  (min =  +2.98 V, max =  +3.63 V)   
Vbat:        +3.01 V  (min =  +2.70 V, max =  +3.30 V)   
fan1:          0 RPM  (min =  340 RPM, div = 128)  ALARM
fan2:        811 RPM  (min =  332 RPM, div = 16)
fan3:          0 RPM  (min =  340 RPM, div = 128)  ALARM
fan4:          0 RPM  (min =  340 RPM, div = 128)  ALARM
fan5:          0 RPM  (min =  527 RPM, div = 128)  ALARM
temp1:       +28.0°C  (high = +72.0°C, hyst =  +0.0°C)  sensor = thermistor
temp2:       +29.0°C  (high = +70.0°C, hyst = +65.0°C)  sensor = diode
temp3:       +38.5°C  (high = +70.0°C, hyst = +65.0°C)  sensor = thermistor
cpu0_vid:   +0.000 V

Before everybody tells me to start using the search engine: I've done so already but I didnt help me so far. Looking through the problems other Users have had I found this fix but its not working for me.

I adjusted the following line in /etc/default/grub and updated the grub.cfg via grub-mkconfig and rebooted:

GRUB_CMDLINE_LINUX="acpi_enforce_resources=lax"

Obviously I also ran 'sudo sensors-detect --auto' before rebooting.

I'm a little stuck here. Any ideas? Help would be appreciated. Also I'm kind of a newbie so I'm sorry if I'm just not seeing something obvious...

thanks!

EDIT:

In case needed, here is the output of 'sensors-detect':

[theguy@thething ~]$ sudo sensors-detect --auto
# sensors-detect revision $Revision$
# System: LENOVO 20HAS01E00 [ThinkPad T570] (laptop)
# Kernel: 4.14.15-1-ARCH x86_64
# Processor: Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-7500U CPU @ 2.70GHz (6/142/9)

Running in automatic mode, default answers to all questions
are assumed.

Some south bridges, CPUs or memory controllers contain embedded sensors.
Do you want to scan for them? This is totally safe. (YES/no): 
Module cpuid loaded successfully.
Silicon Integrated Systems SIS5595...                       No
VIA VT82C686 Integrated Sensors...                          No
VIA VT8231 Integrated Sensors...                            No
AMD K8 thermal sensors...                                   No
AMD Family 10h thermal sensors...                           No
AMD Family 11h thermal sensors...                           No
AMD Family 12h and 14h thermal sensors...                   No
AMD Family 15h thermal sensors...                           No
AMD Family 16h thermal sensors...                           No
AMD Family 15h power sensors...                             No
AMD Family 16h power sensors...                             No
Intel digital thermal sensor...                             Success!
    (driver `coretemp')
Intel AMB FB-DIMM thermal sensor...                         No
Intel 5500/5520/X58 thermal sensor...                       No
VIA C7 thermal sensor...                                    No
VIA Nano thermal sensor...                                  No

Some Super I/O chips contain embedded sensors. We have to write to
standard I/O ports to probe them. This is usually safe.
Do you want to scan for Super I/O sensors? (YES/no): 
Probing for Super-I/O at 0x2e/0x2f
Trying family `National Semiconductor/ITE'...               No
Trying family `SMSC'...                                     No
Trying family `VIA/Winbond/Nuvoton/Fintek'...               No
Trying family `ITE'...                                      No
Probing for Super-I/O at 0x4e/0x4f
Trying family `National Semiconductor/ITE'...               No
Trying family `SMSC'...                                     Yes
Found unknown chip with ID 0x3001

Some hardware monitoring chips are accessible through the ISA I/O ports.
We have to write to arbitrary I/O ports to probe them. This is usually
safe though. Yes, you do have ISA I/O ports even if you do not have any
ISA slots! Do you want to scan the ISA I/O ports? (YES/no): 
Probing for `National Semiconductor LM78' at 0x290...       No
Probing for `National Semiconductor LM79' at 0x290...       No
Probing for `Winbond W83781D' at 0x290...                   No
Probing for `Winbond W83782D' at 0x290...                   No

Lastly, we can probe the I2C/SMBus adapters for connected hardware
monitoring devices. This is the most risky part, and while it works
reasonably well on most systems, it has been reported to cause trouble
on some systems.
Do you want to probe the I2C/SMBus adapters now? (YES/no): 
Found unknown SMBus adapter 8086:9d23 at 0000:00:1f.4.
Sorry, no supported PCI bus adapters found.
Module i2c-dev loaded successfully.

Next adapter: Synopsys DesignWare I2C adapter (i2c-0)
Do you want to scan it? (YES/no/selectively): 
Adapter doesn't support all probing functions.
Some addresses won't be probed.

Next adapter: SMBus I801 adapter at efa0 (i2c-1)
Do you want to scan it? (YES/no/selectively): 

Next adapter: i915 gmbus dpc (i2c-2)
Do you want to scan it? (yes/NO/selectively): 

Next adapter: i915 gmbus dpb (i2c-3)
Do you want to scan it? (yes/NO/selectively): 

Next adapter: i915 gmbus dpd (i2c-4)
Do you want to scan it? (yes/NO/selectively): 

Next adapter: DPDDC-A (i2c-5)
Do you want to scan it? (yes/NO/selectively): 

Next adapter: DPDDC-B (i2c-6)
Do you want to scan it? (yes/NO/selectively): 

Next adapter: DPDDC-C (i2c-7)
Do you want to scan it? (yes/NO/selectively): 


Now follows a summary of the probes I have just done.

Driver `coretemp':
  * Chip `Intel digital thermal sensor' (confidence: 9)

Do you want to overwrite /etc/conf.d/lm_sensors? (YES/no): 
Unloading i2c-dev... OK
Unloading cpuid... OK

Last edited by battosai147 (2018-01-25 21:38:53)

R00KIE · 2018-01-25 22:21:30

Different systems have different monitoring capabilities, on top of that lm_sensors needs to know how to "talk" with the circuit doing the monitoring if there is one. The output you are seeing looks just about right, I'd say that what you expect is the exception.

battosai147 · 2018-01-25 22:31:15

Thank you for the quick reply. The issue I have is that I have Windows installed on the machine as well for some Software that doesnt do too well in wine and there I can use tools such as CPU-Z to see more detailed data (e.g. voltages). So if Windows can do it then Unix should be able to do it at least as good, right?

seth · 2018-01-25 22:42:45

whereas I'm expecting an output

Based on what? Is this a regression on the same system?
Otherwise what makes you believe this system should have the expected sensors? And which in particular?

edit: shit. I shouldn't have fetched that beer in the meantime... ;-)
edit2: shit again. The reason is

Trying family `SMSC'...                                     Yes
Found unknown chip with ID 0x3001

lmsensors finds a SuperI/O chip, but doesn't know how to handle it. You'll have to report that upstream to gain support.

Last edited by seth (2018-01-25 22:52:12)

Slithery · 2018-01-25 22:52:53

battosai147 wrote:

So if Windows can do it then Unix should be able to do it at least as good, right?

What gives you that idea? Motherboard manufacturers put as little effort into their firmware as possible, as soon as they've got it working with Windows they tend to stop development - even if they haven't fully implemented the needed functions for proper OS support.

Last edited by Slithery (2018-01-25 22:56:08)

graysky · 2018-01-25 22:56:20

If you're sure that the data is associated with the physical sensor from windows, you should be able to reproduce under Linux. See: https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Lm … and_tricks

Note that depending on the age of the hardware, a custom module might be needed if support is not yet mainlined in the kernel.

battosai147 · 2018-01-30 11:00:12

@Seth:

Based on what? Is this a regression on the same system?

Yes, it's the output is from the same system.

lmsensors finds a SuperI/O chip, but doesn't know how to handle it. You'll have to report that upstream to gain support.

Sorry for my incompetence but what do I have to report here? Can you help me with how to get the information you need to help me out?

@graysky:

If you're sure that the data is associated with the physical sensor from windows, you should be able to reproduce under Linux. See: https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Lm … and_tricks

I went through that whole article but couldn't do it...

Note that depending on the age of the hardware, a custom module might be needed if support is not yet mainlined in the kernel.

How do I find out what custom module I need then?

seth · 2018-01-30 12:10:41

You mean the

[user@host ~]$ sensors

output is from the very same system as the

[reducted_user@reducted_host ~]$ sensors

output?
What makes the difference? On what OS/version did you generate each?

Upstream bugtracker is https://github.com/groeck/lm-sensors/issues - you'll have to provide details on your HW. If both outputs are indeed on the same system, that will be quite helpful information, I guess.

battosai147 · 2018-01-30 12:32:42

Sorry, no, that was a misunderstanding. I wanted to say that it is the same machine that Arch and Windows are running on. The other output was copied from another User.

I'll take a look at the link you provided now...

battosai147 · 2018-01-30 17:01:45

seth wrote:

edit2: shit again. The reason is
Trying family `SMSC'... Yes
Found unknown chip with ID 0x3001
lmsensors finds a SuperI/O chip, but doesn't know how to handle it. You'll have to report that upstream to gain support.

I ran the "superiotool" now and this is my output:

[user@host ~]$ sudo superiotool
superiotool r4.7-177-gec91dd8feb
Found SMSC FDC37C93xAPM (id=0x30, rev=0x01) at 0x4e

How do I continue from here? Is this still something to post on https://github.com/groeck/lm-sensors/issues or do I "just" have to find the driver for that Super I/O Chip somewhere first and then everything works fine? (If so where would I look?)

Last edited by battosai147 (2018-01-30 17:03:13)

seth · 2018-01-30 18:53:19

*shrug* - in best case, the ID just needs to be hokked w/ the SMSC family (following a common or similar interface), but the lmsensors devs are probably more qualified than any other random person to tell you that.

Arch Linux

#1 2018-01-25 21:37:00

lm_sensors is lacking infos

#2 2018-01-25 22:21:30

Re: lm_sensors is lacking infos

#3 2018-01-25 22:31:15

Re: lm_sensors is lacking infos

#4 2018-01-25 22:42:45

Re: lm_sensors is lacking infos

#5 2018-01-25 22:52:53

Re: lm_sensors is lacking infos

#6 2018-01-25 22:56:20

Re: lm_sensors is lacking infos

#7 2018-01-30 11:00:12

Re: lm_sensors is lacking infos

#8 2018-01-30 12:10:41

Re: lm_sensors is lacking infos

#9 2018-01-30 12:32:42

Re: lm_sensors is lacking infos

#10 2018-01-30 17:01:45

Re: lm_sensors is lacking infos

#11 2018-01-30 18:53:19

Re: lm_sensors is lacking infos

Board footer