A mysterious shut-down...

SGI hardware problems, solutions, tips, hacks, etc.
Forum rules
Any posts concerning pirated software or offering to buy/sell/trade commercial software are subject to removal.
User avatar
Oskar45
Posts: 2145
Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2005 2:35 am
Location: Vienna, Austria

A mysterious shut-down...

Unread postby Oskar45 » Sat Jul 29, 2006 7:18 am

I normally leave my Fuel run 24x7; however, the other day when I came home it was down and after reboot, I'd found in syslog:
unix: |$(0x15a)WARNING: 001a01 ATTN: 1.5V low warning limit reached @ 1.340V.
unix: |$(0x15a)WARNING: 001a01 ATTN: 1.5V low warning limit reached @ 1.269V.
unix: |$(0x160)WARNING: 001a01 ATTN: 1.5V level stabilized @ 1.452V.
unix: |$(0x15a)WARNING: 001a01 ATTN: 1.5V low warning limit reached @ 1.255V.
unix: |$(0x160)WARNING: 001a01 ATTN: 1.5V level stabilized @ 1.354V.
unix: |$(0x158)WARNING: 001a01 ATTN: 1.5V low fault limit reached @ 1.199V.
unix: WARNING: Auto power down will be delayed until shutdown is complete.
unix: |$(0x163)WARNING: 001a01 ATTN: power down aborted, environmental monitor reset
Xsession: mephisto: logout
INFO: The system is shutting down.
INFO: Please wait.
4D:IRIS /usr/etc/eventmond[794]: The child process was killed by the signal 9
0D:IRIS inetd[265]: inetd received SIGTERM; terminating.
3F:IRIS syslogd: going down on signal 15

What in your opinion is the exact reason for that? Can I do anything about it?
Curious: the first recorded successful pregnancy brought forth a murderer...

hamei
Posts: 10031
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2004 4:10 pm
Location: over the rainbow

Re: A mysterious shut-down...

Unread postby hamei » Sat Jul 29, 2006 7:39 am

Oskar45 wrote:I normally leave my Fuel run 24x7; however, the other day when I came home it was down and after reboot, I'd found in syslog:

Code: Select all

unix: |$(0x15a)WARNING: 001a01 ATTN: 1.5V low warning limit reached @  1.340V.
unix: |$(0x15a)WARNING: 001a01 ATTN: 1.5V low warning limit reached @  1.269V.
unix: |$(0x160)WARNING: 001a01 ATTN: 1.5V level stabilized @  1.452V.
unix: |$(0x15a)WARNING: 001a01 ATTN: 1.5V low warning limit reached @  1.255V.
unix: |$(0x160)WARNING: 001a01 ATTN: 1.5V level stabilized @  1.354V.
unix: |$(0x158)WARNING: 001a01 ATTN: 1.5V low fault limit reached @  1.199V.

What in your opinion is the exact reason for that?

Mainboard monitoring failure ...
Can I do anything about it?

You have a service contract. Get a new one. In the meanwhile < l1cmd env off > will get you back running. That's what us normal mortals have to do :) The environment monitoring on Fuel sucks. SGI probably lost plenty of money by cheapying out on the components there. Save a nickel, lose a dollar MBA-think. Oops.

User avatar
Oskar45
Posts: 2145
Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2005 2:35 am
Location: Vienna, Austria

Re: A mysterious shut-down...

Unread postby Oskar45 » Sat Jul 29, 2006 10:57 am

hamei wrote:You have a service contract. Get a new one.

Heh, hamei, you really recall that I've a service contract!!! Congrats to your brain - should be preserved in some nicely-labelled jar!!! Anyway, I'll be fine with a new board in a few days. Don't want to think about what it oost me without contract, though!
Curious: the first recorded successful pregnancy brought forth a murderer...

hamei
Posts: 10031
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2004 4:10 pm
Location: over the rainbow

Re: A mysterious shut-down...

Unread postby hamei » Sat Jul 29, 2006 11:27 am

Oskar45 wrote:
hamei wrote:You have a service contract. Get a new one.

Heh, hamei, you really recall that I've a service contract!!! Congrats to your brain - should be preserved in some nicely-labelled jar!!!

It was, originally. Abby something ...

User avatar
zafunk
Posts: 1060
Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2004 11:51 pm
Location: Victoria, BC, Canada

Unread postby zafunk » Mon Jul 31, 2006 6:51 am

I had the same problem recently and had to kill the environmental monitoring. I don't have a contract though :(

unixmuseum
Posts: 2783
Joined: Mon Apr 19, 2004 4:25 pm
Location: Los Angeles, CA

Re: A mysterious shut-down...

Unread postby unixmuseum » Mon Jul 31, 2006 7:03 am

hamei wrote:It was, originally. Abby something ...
:-D :-D :-D

User avatar
Oskar45
Posts: 2145
Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2005 2:35 am
Location: Vienna, Austria

Unread postby Oskar45 » Mon Jul 31, 2006 7:26 am

zafunk wrote:I had the same problem recently and had to kill the environmental monitoring.

Hmm, I'm not sure that killing env monitoring will save you. As I've noted in my original post of this thread, the messages are written by the kernel so they will be in the syslog even if eventmond is not running. Also, I suspect my box would have been killed anyway regardless of whether eventmond was running or not ...
Curious: the first recorded successful pregnancy brought forth a murderer...

User avatar
zafunk
Posts: 1060
Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2004 11:51 pm
Location: Victoria, BC, Canada

Unread postby zafunk » Mon Jul 31, 2006 7:36 am

Oskar45 wrote:Hmm, I'm not sure that killing env monitoring will save you. As I've noted in my original post of this thread, the messages are written by the kernel so they will be in the syslog even if eventmond is not running. Also, I suspect my box would have been killed anyway regardless of whether eventmond was running or not ...


Hmm.... well, only time will tell. So far, turning the monitoring off has saved me, but I may have to get a new mobo eventually :(

User avatar
nekonoko
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 8031
Joined: Thu Jan 23, 2003 1:31 am
Location: Pleasanton, California
Contact:

Unread postby nekonoko » Mon Jul 31, 2006 8:40 am

Oskar45 wrote:
zafunk wrote:I had the same problem recently and had to kill the environmental monitoring.

Hmm, I'm not sure that killing env monitoring will save you. As I've noted in my original post of this thread, the messages are written by the kernel so they will be in the syslog even if eventmond is not running. Also, I suspect my box would have been killed anyway regardless of whether eventmond was running or not ...


If you're shutting off env monitoring on the L1 (which is the case here) it won't report anything to the kernel. No-one said anything about turning off eventmond - this is more low level :)
Twitter: @neko_no_ko
IRIX Release 4.0.5 IP12 Version 06151813 System V
Copyright 1987-1992 Silicon Graphics, Inc.
All Rights Reserved.

hamei
Posts: 10031
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2004 4:10 pm
Location: over the rainbow

Unread postby hamei » Mon Jul 31, 2006 5:56 pm

zafunk wrote: Hmm.... well, only time will tell. So far, turning the monitoring off has saved me, but I may have to get a new mobo eventually :(

Going on two years now here .... if it finally dies it'll go into the scrapper. The Fuel just isn't that great a computer to spend SGI's version of money on.

User avatar
yetanother**ixuser
Posts: 445
Joined: Fri May 21, 2004 4:47 am
Location: Flynn's Arcade

Unread postby yetanother**ixuser » Mon Jul 31, 2006 10:18 pm

agreed :twisted:

User avatar
foetz
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 5737
Joined: Mon Apr 14, 2003 4:34 am
Contact:

Unread postby foetz » Tue Aug 01, 2006 11:06 am

hamei wrote:
zafunk wrote: Hmm.... well, only time will tell. So far, turning the monitoring off has saved me, but I may have to get a new mobo eventually :(

Going on two years now here .... if it finally dies it'll go into the scrapper. The Fuel just isn't that great a computer to spend SGI's version of money on.


yes, sadly the fuel was more sort of a mips-pc like the alpha-pc those days or the 604e based ibms.
r-a-c.de

hamei
Posts: 10031
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2004 4:10 pm
Location: over the rainbow

Unread postby hamei » Tue Aug 01, 2006 5:15 pm

foetz wrote: yes, sadly the fuel was more sort of a mips-pc like the alpha-pc those days or the 604e based ibms.

Didn't mean to come off as quite so negative about the Fuel - it's not a bad computer, actually. It's just that SGI still had their heads up their asses when they priced it. Okay, the mainboard and cpu are low-volume high-cost items. But $600 for an off-the-shelf peecee case ? The exact same one they used in the 230 and 330 machines ? And the rest of their Fuel prices are equally nonsensical. No wonder they are bankrupt. No one who isn't a fanboy (us) is gonna spend six times what something is worth just because it says SGI on the outside. And then they shit on their fanboy constituency. Great.

User avatar
Dr. Dave
Posts: 2311
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 10:37 pm
Location: Ottawa, Canada >burp<

Unread postby Dr. Dave » Tue Aug 01, 2006 5:30 pm

You know, it sounds like these monitoring boards can probably be fixed... judging by what Oskar posted earlier, looks like it may be capacitors or something oscillating in the buffer amps. Anyone got a really good clear picture (IC part number readability is good) of what one looks like, working or not?
:O3000: <> :O3000: :O2000: :Tezro: :Fuel: x2+ :Octane2: :Octane: x3 :1600SW: x2 :O2: x2+ :Indigo2IMP: :Indigo2: x2 :Indigo: x3 :Indy: x2+

Once you step up to the big iron, you learn all about physics, electrical standards, and first aid - usually all in the same day

User avatar
Oskar45
Posts: 2145
Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2005 2:35 am
Location: Vienna, Austria

Unread postby Oskar45 » Wed Aug 02, 2006 6:15 am

nekonoko wrote:
Oskar45 wrote:
zafunk wrote:I had the same problem recently and had to kill the environmental monitoring.

Hmm, I'm not sure that killing env monitoring will save you. As I've noted in my original post of this thread, the messages are written by the kernel so they will be in the syslog even if eventmond is not running. Also, I suspect my box would have been killed anyway regardless of whether eventmond was running or not ...


If you're shutting off env monitoring on the L1 (which is the case here) it won't report anything to the kernel. No-one said anything about turning off eventmond - this is more low level :)

Hmm - does that mean, if you shut off monitoring on the L1, the box would not die even if the voltage gets too low???
Curious: the first recorded successful pregnancy brought forth a murderer...


Return to “SGI: Hardware”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Yahoo [Bot] and 0 guests