Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 17 Mar 2009 21:31:46 +0200
From:      Andriy Gapon <avg@icyb.net.ua>
To:        Harald Schmalzbauer <h.schmalzbauer@omnilan.de>
Cc:        freebsd-current@freebsd.org, Mike Tancsa <mike@sentex.net>
Subject:   Re: ichwd on ich9 attach failing ?
Message-ID:  <49BFFAA2.3000603@icyb.net.ua>
In-Reply-To: <49BFE933.9040706@omnilan.de>
References:  <200810011405.m91E5ugg028685@lava.sentex.ca>	<200810011121.21908.jhb@freebsd.org> <49BD0943.3000400@OmniLAN.de> <200903161501.n2GF1bNw090788@lava.sentex.ca> <49BE81DB.6040208@icyb.net.ua> <49BFAEB1.1010800@freebsd.org> <49BFE933.9040706@omnilan.de>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
on 17/03/2009 20:17 Harald Schmalzbauer said the following:
> One thing which is also new to me is an attached IPMI wtachdog. No idea
> about IPMI (yet) but maybe the wd-timer is just occupated by BMC/IPMI?!
> 
> ipmi0: IPMI device rev. 1, firmware rev. 0.2, version 2.0
> ipmi0: Number of channels 2
> ipmi0: Attached watchdog

I think that this is unlikely.
There can definitely be other agents that could reload watchdog's timer, of
course. It is even possible to do that via SMBus interface (where ICH acts as
slave). But I don't think that micro-controllers typically do that.

It's possible to monitor TCO_RLD value and see if it gets reloaded to TCO_TMR
value even after watchdogd dies a violent death.

-- 
Andriy Gapon



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?49BFFAA2.3000603>