Can't get lm-sensors to work

I can't seem to get the lm-sensors package to work on this computer. I've already had success on other computers, but this one has been giving me a hard time.

It's an Intel Core 2 Duo E6400 on an Intel DG965SS motherboard running Scientific Linux 5.0 (Boron) with a 2.6.18 linux kernel.

I've run sensors-detect and got:

Quote:
To make the sensors modules behave correctly, add these lines to
/etc/modprobe.conf:

#----cut here----
# I2C module options
alias char-major-89 i2c-dev
#----cut here----

To load everything that is needed, add this to some /etc/rc* file:

#----cut here----
# I2C adapter drivers
modprobe i2c-i801
# I2C chip drivers
modprobe eeprom
# sleep 2 # optional
/usr/bin/sensors -s # recommended
#----cut here----


I placed the "some /etc/rc*" file inside rc.local. I've even tried loading the modules manually, and got nothing. I tried lsmod, and it shows I don't have i2c-sensor loaded; however, modprobing for i2c_sensor or i2c-sensor gives me a "FATAL: Module i2c(-whatever you try) not found".

How can I get this to work? I've run out of ideas! Please help!!!! :bounce:
13 answers Last reply
More about sensors work
  1. Oh, and one other thing: The only stuff sensors-detect actually detected was:
    Quote:
    Next adapter: SMBus I801 adapter at 2000
    Do you want to scan it? (YES/no/selectively): yes
    Client found at address 0x08
    Client found at address 0x30
    Client found at address 0x31
    Client found at address 0x32
    Client found at address 0x33
    Client found at address 0x44
    Probing for `Maxim MAX6633/MAX6634/MAX6635'... Failed!
    Client found at address 0x50
    Probing for `SPD EEPROM'... Success!
    (confidence 8, driver `eeprom')
    Probing for `DDC monitor'... Failed!
    Probing for `Maxim MAX6900'... Failed!
    Client found at address 0x51
    Probing for `SPD EEPROM'... Success!
    (confidence 8, driver `eeprom')
    Client found at address 0x52
    Probing for `SPD EEPROM'... Success!
    (confidence 8, driver `eeprom')
    Client found at address 0x53
    Probing for `SPD EEPROM'... Success!
    (confidence 8, driver `eeprom')
    Client found at address 0x69
  2. The required modules are "i2c-i801" and "eeprom"

    i2c_sensor and i2c-sensor do not exist therefore you cannot load them.


    modprobe i2c-i801
    modprobe eeprom
    /usr/bin/sensors -s

    /usr/bin/sensors

    should do the trick


    However you may not get any useful information from those sensors.

    Some motherboards have terrible, inaccurate or incompatible sensors.

    Good luck :)
  3. Thanks, linux_0. I've tried loading exactly that by doing:

    /sbin/./modprobe i2c-i801
    /sbin/./modprobe eeprom
    /usr/bin/./sensors -s

    And I still get a "No sensors found!" message. I'm thinking it may be an issue with this distro's unusual paths. I've had to manually modify the script for sensors-detect to find i2c-detect, which wasn't under usr/local/sbin, but rather under usr/sbin.

    Could these strange paths be the problem? Should I do some other manual modifications? Or do I simply have an incompatible sensor chip? It's an Intel motherboard (not my choice, mind you) but I was under the impression that there would still be a reasonably reliable way to monitor hardware under linux.
  4. When you ran sensors-detect did you save the configuration file when prompted?

    Did you install lm_sensors with yum or some other way?
  5. I saved the configuration file when prompted, yes. The only non-commented lines from /etc/sysconfig/lm-sensors are:
    Quote:
    MODULE_0=i2c-i801
    MODULE_1=eeprom

    These are two modules that, according to lsmod, have been loaded correctly.

    I installed lm-sensors using the GNOME interface, not yum, but I suspect that won't matter. I could uninstall lm-sensors and use yum install lm-sensors, though, just to be sure.

    I'll do that tomorrow. Thanks for your help.
  6. The GNOME interface uses yum so there's no need :)

    It is possible your board may have an incompatible sensor.

    You could also try to install a new version of lm_sensors from source to see if a newer version works any better.

    New motherboards are released all the time and it is very hard to keep up with all the new sensor chips and components and it is even worse if they use proprietary chips which are not open source friendly.

    This problem is not unique to Linux, many windows programs which handle sensors ( speedfan, MBM5, ASUS doctor, nVidia and ATI sensors, etc ) often have the very same issues.
  7. Yes, I know it must be tough. There are a lot of sensor chips out there.

    Well, I think I'll run a few thermals in windows with prime95 and see if this computer has reasonable maximum temperatures.

    I usually use ASUS motherboards, which, AFAIK, usually have Winbond chips and thermal monitoring works OK in linux (this is an Intel mobo). I've done the sensors-detect routine before and had no problems. Well, I'll try a little more under linux, but I'm kind of giving up linux temp monitoring on this motherboard.

    Thanks a lot for your help though!!! :D
  8. It might work with the latest version of lm_sensors

    If you can positively ID the sensor chip, you can try to google it and see if lm_sensors supports it or if there's a patch.

    Good luck :)
  9. Or you can get a board that works :d
  10. Yeah, well, I updated the BIOS, because I was using a very old version.

    But then, the machine was extremely slow. Apparently, this has to do with the fact that we're using 4GB (4 DIMMs).

    Ah crap, I told them to get a better motherboard, but noone listens to me anyway.

    I downgraded to the last bios that works (1669, for anyone interested), and I can then use 4GB of memory. I'm now reinstalling lm-sensors to see if there's any improvement, but I've lost my hopes with this motherboard. It's simply no good.
  11. I share your frustration most intel boards and intel chipsets have really disappointed me. :(
  12. Well, I don't know, Intel chipsets are good on their own. But this motherboard was a disappointment.

    I guess that it might be because of it being "Essential Series". It's a basic motherboard. But I don't really know. I haven't had much experience with Intel-branded motherboards... I've used ASUS and Gigabyte, mostly... and DFI mobos too. These are also great.
  13. ASUS, Gigabyte and DFI boards tend to be pretty good.

    However I have had issues with all kinds of intel boards and chipsets. Non-intel boards and chipsets too but not quite as bad.
Ask a new question