Message ID | 1240930084.10689.39.camel@localhost.localdomain |
---|---|
State | Changes Requested, archived |
Delegated to: | David Miller |
Headers | show |
From: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <jdb@comx.dk> Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2009 16:48:04 +0200 > > The sfc driver can detect different hardware failures via the > LM87 system. One of the failures I have experienced is the > temperature alarm, but the error message didn't reveal that this > error was temperature related. I had to read the code to > discover that. > > I think that the temperature error should be more explicit, in > order to warn people before the board is permanently damaged. > > Signed-off-by: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hawk@comx.dk> Ben, ACK or something? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On Tue, 2009-04-28 at 16:48 +0200, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote: > The sfc driver can detect different hardware failures via the > LM87 system. One of the failures I have experienced is the > temperature alarm, but the error message didn't reveal that this > error was temperature related. I had to read the code to > discover that. > > I think that the temperature error should be more explicit, in > order to warn people before the board is permanently damaged. You are right, but... > diff --git a/drivers/net/sfc/boards.c b/drivers/net/sfc/boards.c > index 4a4c74c..b1822fe 100644 > --- a/drivers/net/sfc/boards.c > +++ b/drivers/net/sfc/boards.c > @@ -121,8 +121,10 @@ static int efx_check_lm87(struct efx_nic *efx, unsigned mask) > if (alarms1 || alarms2) { > EFX_ERR(efx, > "LM87 detected a hardware failure (status %02x:%02x)" > - "%s%s\n", > + "%s%s%s\n", > alarms1, alarms2, > + (alarms1 & (LM87_ALARM_TEMP_INT|LM87_ALARM_TEMP_EXT1)) > + ? " high temperature" : "", > (alarms1 & LM87_ALARM_TEMP_INT) ? " INTERNAL" : "", > (alarms1 & LM87_ALARM_TEMP_EXT1) ? " EXTERNAL" : ""); > return -ERANGE; We could be more explicit still. How about: EFX_ERR(efx, "%s out of range (LM87 status %02x:%02x)\n", (alarms1 & LM87_ALARM_TEMP_INT) ? "Board temperature" : (alarms1 & LM87_ALARM_TEMP_EXT1) ? "Controller temperature : "Voltage", alarms1, alarms2); Ben.
diff --git a/drivers/net/sfc/boards.c b/drivers/net/sfc/boards.c index 4a4c74c..b1822fe 100644 --- a/drivers/net/sfc/boards.c +++ b/drivers/net/sfc/boards.c @@ -121,8 +121,10 @@ static int efx_check_lm87(struct efx_nic *efx, unsigned mask) if (alarms1 || alarms2) { EFX_ERR(efx, "LM87 detected a hardware failure (status %02x:%02x)" - "%s%s\n", + "%s%s%s\n", alarms1, alarms2, + (alarms1 & (LM87_ALARM_TEMP_INT|LM87_ALARM_TEMP_EXT1)) + ? " high temperature" : "", (alarms1 & LM87_ALARM_TEMP_INT) ? " INTERNAL" : "", (alarms1 & LM87_ALARM_TEMP_EXT1) ? " EXTERNAL" : ""); return -ERANGE;
The sfc driver can detect different hardware failures via the LM87 system. One of the failures I have experienced is the temperature alarm, but the error message didn't reveal that this error was temperature related. I had to read the code to discover that. I think that the temperature error should be more explicit, in order to warn people before the board is permanently damaged. Signed-off-by: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hawk@comx.dk> --- drivers/net/sfc/boards.c | 4 +++- 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html