Created attachment 5547 Image showing the only detected sensor Hello. My sensors are handled via the i2c_i801 module. Gkrellm can see them without any problem, but xfce4-sensors-plugin doesn't list any of them, but for one named "BODEN35" (which I have no idea what meassures at all). As said, the module is loaded, and other tools see my sensors just fine. I have no special requirements. I only want to be able to monitor the temperature of my cores so that I can be sure nothing is gonna blow up. I'll just add that compiling lm_sensors support or not doesn't change anything. The rest of userland tools do not need lm_sensors at all to be able to use my sensors in this machine, since I make sure the relevant module is at boot time. I can provide any info you need. Just ask. Thanks :)
(In reply to Jesús Guerrero Botella from comment #0) So is your sensor shown in the output of the "sensors" command as indicated on the wiki page in your provided screenshot? If not, and it seems that ACPI doesn't provide information from this sensor, then all other tools that show your value seem to use a different library or means to access the value. Also, maybe it depends on your sensors-plugin compile-time configuration of whether it accesses /sys/ oder /proc/acpi and so on. So if you could please send me the output of the last few lines when running ./configure in the extracted source packet? Do you know which means the other tols use to access i2c_i801?
Hi! (In reply to Fabian Nowak from comment #1) > (In reply to Jesús Guerrero Botella from comment #0) > > So is your sensor shown in the output of the "sensors" command as indicated > on the wiki page in your provided screenshot? The output for sensors is: $ sensors acpitz-virtual-0 Adapter: Virtual device temp1: +51.0°C (crit = +96.0°C) temp2: +38.0°C (crit = +111.0°C) coretemp-isa-0000 Adapter: ISA adapter Core 0: +33.0°C (high = +100.0°C, crit = +100.0°C) Core 1: +35.0°C (high = +100.0°C, crit = +100.0°C) > > If not, and it seems that ACPI doesn't provide information from this sensor, > then all other tools that show your value seem to use a different library or > means to access the value. Also, maybe it depends on your sensors-plugin > compile-time configuration of whether it accesses /sys/ oder /proc/acpi and > so on. gkrellm, for one, can see both sets of sensors (acpi and coretemp), it also shows the nvidia gpu sensor (which the sensors command doesn't show). I haven't looked the code, but I guess that gkrellm at least in my case reads the battery/ac etc. status from /proc/acpi, and uses /sys/bus/acpi for the thermal_zoneX stuff. But that's just my guess. In any case, gkrellm sensors are named this way: coretemp-hwmon1/temp2 coretemp-hwmon1/temp3 thermal_zone0 thermal_zone1 nvidia gpu core > > So if you could please send me the output of the last few lines when running > ./configure in the extracted source packet? Do you know which means the > other tols use to access i2c_i801? I attached the whole configure output for xfce4-sensors-plugin. This last build has lm_sensors disabled on purpose, but it doesn't really make a difference, it should still get acpi sensors and it doesn't. As said above, I can't tell for sure how gkrellm does the job, but it reads both the acpi thermal zones and the coretemp values. The strange thing is that the xfce plugin can't read any of them at all. Just acpi would serve me well. I just want to get an approximation on what the temperature of my cpu is. As long as it doesn't get into flames, it's alright. :) I am using Gentoo, so it's perfectly possible that xfce4-sensors-plugin is relying in any dependency being built with support for featureX that I don't have. But I can't figure what that would be. Thanks :)
Created attachment 5963 configure log
OK, it seems from your config that the plugin is reading from /sys/fs. I have a system available for testing reading /sys/fs as it seems. The configure output did mention explicitly that sys is used for ACPI. So could you try configuring with --enableprocacpi or --disablesysfsacpi and building? Should set HAVE_PROCACPI in the config, but not set HAVE_SYSFS. then try building, installing and running xfce4-sensors, please. Does it still show ACPI output? More? Less? The ACPI stuff is only read from /proc if it finds /proc/acpi/info. the ibm folder is not considered. Might come in future. The sysfs stuff is read from /sys/bus/acpi/ and deeper as it seems.
(In reply to Fabian Nowak from comment #4) > OK, it seems from your config that the plugin is reading from /sys/fs. I > have a system available for testing reading /sys/fs as it seems. The > configure output did mention explicitly that sys is used for ACPI. So could > you try configuring with --enableprocacpi or --disablesysfsacpi and > building? Should set HAVE_PROCACPI in the config, but not set HAVE_SYSFS. > then try building, installing and running xfce4-sensors, please. Does it > still show ACPI output? More? Less? > > The ACPI stuff is only read from /proc if it finds /proc/acpi/info. the ibm > folder is not considered. Might come in future. > > The sysfs stuff is read from /sys/bus/acpi/ and deeper as it seems. Hi. If I build with --enable-procacpi --disable-sysfsacpi then BODEN35 disappears, and a new sensor called BAT0 shows which is my laptop battery. But nothing else. If I use --disable-procacpi --enable-sysfsacpi then BODEN35 comes back. I suspect that BODEN thing is just the same battery sensor. I think that maybe my sensors are exposed in a slightly non-standard way and xfce4-sensors can't see the paths or something.
(In reply to Jesús Guerrero Botella from comment #5) > (In reply to Fabian Nowak from comment #4) > > If I build with --enable-procacpi --disable-sysfsacpi then BODEN35 > disappears, and a new sensor called BAT0 shows which is my laptop battery. > But nothing else. > > If I use --disable-procacpi --enable-sysfsacpi then BODEN35 comes back. > > I suspect that BODEN thing is just the same battery sensor. I think that > maybe my sensors are exposed in a slightly non-standard way and > xfce4-sensors can't see the paths or something. Exactly. Thanks for helping investigating. I could need your tree of /sys/bus/acpi/ and /sys/class/power_supply/ and /sys/class/thermal/, please (tree is a command-line tool available, e.g., via your favorite package management system). As a side note, enabling sysfsacpi in xfce4-sensors-plugin will enable procacpi as well, so there is no need to explicitly enable both of them, and actually, I had thought them to be activated either the one or the other.
(In reply to Fabian Nowak from comment #6) > As a side note, enabling sysfsacpi in xfce4-sensors-plugin will enable > procacpi as well, so there is no need to explicitly enable both of them, and > actually, I had thought them to be activated either the one or the other. Actually, the best thing is to leave all of them untouched; then the output from configure will show, whether ACPI is really activated due to existing sysfs or /proc/acpi/info.
(In reply to Fabian Nowak from comment #7) > (In reply to Fabian Nowak from comment #6) > > As a side note, enabling sysfsacpi in xfce4-sensors-plugin will enable > > procacpi as well, so there is no need to explicitly enable both of them, and > > actually, I had thought them to be activated either the one or the other. > > Actually, the best thing is to leave all of them untouched; then the output > from configure will show, whether ACPI is really activated due to existing > sysfs or /proc/acpi/info. Ah, and /sys/class/power_supply/BAT0/model_name (or a similar path) might contain BODEN in your case. And I noticed in the code that thermal_zoneX entries are not considered yet. Currently fixing (and profiting on my own ;)
(In reply to Fabian Nowak from comment #6) > (In reply to Jesús Guerrero Botella from comment #5) > > (In reply to Fabian Nowak from comment #4) > > > > I suspect that BODEN thing is just the same battery sensor. I think that > > maybe my sensors are exposed in a slightly non-standard way and > > xfce4-sensors can't see the paths or something. > > Exactly. Thanks for helping investigating. I could need your tree of > /sys/bus/acpi/ and /sys/class/power_supply/ and /sys/class/thermal/, please > (tree is a command-line tool available, e.g., via your favorite package > management system). I know the tree tool, no need to look for it since I always keep a good set of CLI tools around. It's about GUI's that I don't have much clue nowadays hehe. I'll attach the tree output for all these three paths right now. Thanks :)
Created attachment 5993 /sys/bus/acpi/ tree structure
Created attachment 5994 /sys/class/power_supply tree structure
Created attachment 5995 /sys/class/thermal tree structure
(In reply to Fabian Nowak from comment #7) > (In reply to Fabian Nowak from comment #6) > > As a side note, enabling sysfsacpi in xfce4-sensors-plugin will enable > > procacpi as well, so there is no need to explicitly enable both of them, and > > actually, I had thought them to be activated either the one or the other. > > Actually, the best thing is to leave all of them untouched; then the output > from configure will show, whether ACPI is really activated due to existing > sysfs or /proc/acpi/info. I just tested, the configure script then does this: =============================================================== Build Configuration =============================================================== The following sensor interfaces will be built into the plugin: * /proc/acpi * /sys/class/power_supply * NVIDIA X CTRL Which seems right. However that doesn't fix anything for me, obviously. But I had to try ;)
(In reply to Fabian Nowak from comment #8) > Ah, and /sys/class/power_supply/BAT0/model_name (or a similar path) might > contain BODEN in your case. Not under /sys, but under /proc I got this one: # grep -r -i boden /proc/acpi/ /proc/acpi/battery/BAT0/info:model number: BODEN35
(In reply to Jesús Guerrero Botella from comment #14) OK, please try newest version. I can read the ACPI thermal zones now as well with sysfs :) And you can use BODEN if you want to. E.g., I always have a decimal battery energy status in my sensors-plugin box.
Seems to work. At least for me ;)
Yeah, now I have lots of sensors. Thank you so much!
Sorry to bother you again but I forgot to ask if there's plan to release a new version or if I should be rolling my own for Gentoo. Thank you once more :)
(In reply to Jesús Guerrero Botella from comment #18) > Sorry to bother you again but I forgot to ask if there's plan to release a > new version or if I should be rolling my own for Gentoo. Thank you once more > :) You're welcome. Can you please tell me, which additional sensors do you see? I guess I will release within the next days thanks due to your problem with ACPI :) The release will be available from http://goodies.xfce.org/projects/panel-plugins/xfce4-sensors-plugin
(In reply to Fabian Nowak from comment #19) > (In reply to Jesús Guerrero Botella from comment #18) > > Sorry to bother you again but I forgot to ask if there's plan to release a > > new version or if I should be rolling my own for Gentoo. Thank you once more > > :) > > You're welcome. Can you please tell me, which additional sensors do you see? Of course, I hope I can represent it accurately here. Previously I had two categories, each with 1 sensor, for a total 2 sensors: ACPI (Boden35) NVIDIA (Geforce go .....) Right now I have: acpitz-0 (temp1, temp2) coretemp-0 (core 0, core 1) ACPI (Boden35, thermal_zone0, thermal_zone1) NVIDIA (geforce go...) That's four categories with a total of 8 sensors. I have no idea if I should be seeing some other sensors or not (voltages, fans, etc.) but gkrellm can't see any of those either so maybe they just don't exist in this crappy Acer machine. > I guess I will release within the next days thanks due to your problem with > ACPI :) > > The release will be available from > http://goodies.xfce.org/projects/panel-plugins/xfce4-sensors-plugin Thanks. I will keep an eye on this.