> On 13 Jul 2019, at 22:36, Mick Sulley <m...@sulley.info> wrote: > > Thank you both for your input. I agree, I do not like the scheduled power > cycle option either and I continue to look for the root cause of the issue. > Let me add just a few more comments: 100% reliability is of course not possible, therefore a watchdog timer may still be useful. > The reason I considered a scheduled power cycle is that it seems that after a > power cycle I do not see any errors, then over a few days or weeks I start to > see errors, 85 reads, device not found, etc and then I get a lockup, although > the timing is very variable. > If you experience a system degradation before lockup, then you can setup a daemon that monitors the 1-wire vitals, and eventually restarts the system when some threshold value is reached. > I do have heartbeat file which is monitored by another machine, so I will > look at using that to power cycle it. > The RPi chip has an hardware watchdog timer, which you can access via /dev/watchdog. Unfortunately the RPi is not able to power cycle itself, but only to reset, so some external board/system is needed to power-cycle the RPi. > One other thought, I have separate power supplies for 1-wire and the Pi. Can > I just power cycle the 1-wire adapter and leave the Pi running? > I have no experience with the DS2482-800 and with HW design, but I understand that you have to power-cycle the 1-wire adapter, no need to cold reboot the RPi host. But maybe I’m mistaken here.
S. > > On 13/07/2019 19:58, Stefano Miccoli via Owfs-developers wrote: >> >> >>> On 11 Jul 2019, at 23:10, Mick Sulley <m...@sulley.info >>> <mailto:m...@sulley.info>> wrote: >>> >>> The reason for the question is that I still have random bus lockups and I >>> am considering creating something to power cycle the system, either on a >>> time basis, e.g. 3am each day, or based on some early warning detection >>> from the data in interface/statistics if that is possible. >>> >>> Does anyone have an opinion on scheduled power cycle? Good idea or not? >> >> This make sense only if you are sure that the bus lockups are **not** >> random, but somehow occur only after some time has elapsed from the last >> power cycle, and this time is longer than one day. >> >> On the contrary if the lookups are truly random, then a reboot every 24h >> just ensures that the longest down-time is less than 24h. If it is >> impossible to avoid random lookups then the most sensible solution would be >> a watchdog timer. This way you can ensure that bus down time is shorter >> that the watchdog time interval itself. >> >> Stefano >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Owfs-developers mailing list >> Owfs-developers@lists.sourceforge.net >> <mailto:Owfs-developers@lists.sourceforge.net> >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/owfs-developers >> <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/owfs-developers> > _______________________________________________ > Owfs-developers mailing list > Owfs-developers@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/owfs-developers
_______________________________________________ Owfs-developers mailing list Owfs-developers@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/owfs-developers
