[PATCH 0/2] hwmon: Update coretemp to current Intel processors
in [Kernel]
|
Prev: [PATCH 0/2] hwmon: Update coretemp to current Intel processors
Next: linux-next: build failure after merge of the usb tree
From: Carsten Emde on 18 May 2010 03:30 On 05/18/2010 08:45 AM, Dmitry Gromov wrote: > On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 01:07, Wan, Huaxu<huaxu.wan(a)intel.com> wrote: >> The TjMax of N270 is 90C, according the official documents [1][2]. >> [1] http://ark.intel.com/Product.aspx?id=36331&processor=N270&spec-codes=SLB73 >> [2] http://download.intel.com/design/processor/datashts/319977.pdf >> Thank you, this is exactly why I'm asking. I think, "guessing" values here > can be dangerous - who knows what critical apps they will relied upon. Yes, of course. I never wanted to use a guessed and not documented value. I only wanted the temperature reading to be plausible. > And 90C seems to be good for N200 series of Atom CPUs only - I could not > find TjMax value published for N330 Dual Core (quite popular one). Intel > only published Tcase for it: > http://ark.intel.com/Product.aspx?id=35641 > So, if for N270 Tcase = TjMax = 90C, then, I'd suggest to use Tcase = 85.2C > for N330 TjMax value. They have the same CPU model ID: # grep model /proc/cpuinfo model : 28 model name : Intel(R) Atom(TM) CPU N270 @ 1.60GHz # grep model /proc/cpuinfo model : 28 model name : Intel(R) Atom(TM) CPU 330 @ 1.60GHz I would like to propose to use the patch as it is. It's the best version we ever had. Carsten. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo(a)vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
From: Dmitry Gromov on 18 May 2010 08:10 Hi! On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 03:01, Carsten Emde <C.Emde(a)osadl.org> wrote: > Dmitry, > >>> Here comes the current version of the coretemp patches. Huaxu did the >>> initial work; Jean suggested to submit them directly to Andrew. >>> >>> I made some style changes as advised by checkpatch. >>> >>> The patches have been tested successfully on Core 2 Duo and Quad, and on >>> Nehalem and Nehalem/Westmere where temperature readings were plausible >>> and >>> changed with load as expected. When tested on an Atom processor (N270), >>> the >>> temperature values were identical to previous versions of the coretemp >>> module and also changed with load. However, the readings should be higher >>> by 10 to 15C as compared to the outside temperature of the processor. >>> Huaxu, could you check? I would guess TjMax to be 105 instead of 90C in >>> these >>> processors. >> >> I apologize, if I ask a stupid question, but are you saying that TjMax in >> coretemp.c should be set to higher value than Tcase-max value specified in >> Intel documents? > > Hmm, no. I am saying that I would like the reading to be correct. I have > measured the outside temperature of the case with an infrared thermometer > [1] and found it to be higher than the readings returned by the coretemp > module. In all other CPUs I have, the coretemp readings are higher than the > case temperature. > Thank you very much for an explanation, Carsten. -- DG NJ -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo(a)vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
From: Dmitry Gromov on 18 May 2010 23:20
Hi! On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 20:50, Huaxu Wan <huaxu.wan(a)linux.intel.com> wrote: > On 02:45 Tue 18 May, Dmitry Gromov wrote: >> Hi! >> >> And 90C seems to be good for N200 series of Atom CPUs only - I could not >> find TjMax value published for N330 Dual Core �(quite popular one). Intel >> only published Tcase for it: >> http://ark.intel.com/Product.aspx?id=35641 >> So, if for N270 Tcase = TjMax = 90C, then, I'd suggest to use Tcase = 85.2C >> for N330 TjMax value. > > Quoted a sentence from [1], "Unless specified otherwise, all specifications for > the processor are at TJ = 90�C", I believe the TjMax of 330 is 90C too. > Well, that refers for the values in that specific table and entire document (which I went through as well) does not specify TjMax :( Similar document for N270 series does specify TjMax explicitly in Table 14: http://download.intel.com/design/processor/datashts/320032.pdf Another document, "Thermal and Mechanical Design Guidelines" for Atom 300 series: http://download.intel.com/design/processor/designex/320530.pdf specifies Tcase-max = 85.2C Thinking about this a bit, I think Tcase-max should be lower than TjMax, which probably is still 90C. The document itself is a good reading too. Anyway, thank you very much for your help, Huaxu! -- DG NJ -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo(a)vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ |