From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1N2Vfg-0003tK-W1 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 26 Oct 2009 19:56:05 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 600D2E0857; Mon, 26 Oct 2009 19:56:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from fg-out-1718.google.com (fg-out-1718.google.com [72.14.220.157]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 22712E0857 for ; Mon, 26 Oct 2009 19:56:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: by fg-out-1718.google.com with SMTP id 16so987106fgg.10 for ; Mon, 26 Oct 2009 12:56:02 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:from:to:subject:date :user-agent:references:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:message-id; bh=Bq0UrC2Gz0s4RxLoCUsChAaDIXoJw+H1lsLh1zmIXsw=; b=QYzyDmWQAc243njH3fRl+nsWvjF29c5JxufZmXpuHhTJQXcnXX7uevBBRQ1rJUwGp2 BsqzZZGGHOJgzItBLhn5NW5SxjyYoqaCbCCZN83+nvcHb6ZA+KTxNkRbtOnnVOJua2DJ hDwWS+Cy/2vJGWowIO1noTPtZvJaKv3+DUL7k= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=from:to:subject:date:user-agent:references:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:message-id; b=gAnJR0ACUATds2Ftl2t32B8WfyOKARGFcULzpfj+LTRlVkIhuvCy+4hbiD+b8OV8oE jJnxydwx3Kk3ZICcYOAA24mw1vOHtW8r776K327I/i79n3Wy14wV1hKI4qu0g6deYCfy HwVO/29UI2Y3sp8VYt/4smD7+Ed3xKrGKC3Mg= Received: by 10.86.229.18 with SMTP id b18mr8546443fgh.34.1256586962262; Mon, 26 Oct 2009 12:56:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from energy.localnet (energy.heim10.tu-clausthal.de [139.174.197.94]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id e3sm10164093fga.13.2009.10.26.12.56.01 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Mon, 26 Oct 2009 12:56:01 -0700 (PDT) From: Volker Armin Hemmann To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: lm_sensors much hotter in 2.6.31 than 2.6.28 Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 20:55:57 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.12.2 (Linux/2.6.31.3r4; KDE/4.3.2; x86_64; ; ) References: <49bf44f10910251437q530ddecdv4a669d2587e70f79@mail.gmail.com> <49bf44f10910261244q218add8araa11fb56c7998d52@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <49bf44f10910261244q218add8araa11fb56c7998d52@mail.gmail.com> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200910262055.57433.volkerarmin@googlemail.com> X-Archives-Salt: a3b23df1-d4c3-419f-86b8-55b1fed03cab X-Archives-Hash: 5c40f464ee06755a58d3d617a34e9f44 On Montag 26 Oktober 2009, Grant wrote: > >> After upgrading from 2.6.28 to 2.6.31, I noticed my CPU temperatures > >> are reported a full 20C hotter. If I load the old kernel, the > >> reported temperatures drops back down to normal. Has anyone else seen > >> this? > > > > If you're using coretemp as sensor, the temps are always off (the > > coretemp sensor of Intel chips is not accurate, not by any stretch of the > > imagination.) It only reports the distance to the CPU's maximum thermal > > junction, which then the coretemp driver *tries* to translate into a > > temperature, but the result is wrong since the value reported by the CPU > > is not accurate to start with (it only gets accurate as you approach the > > max value). That maximum value is totally undocumented for desktop CPUs > > (the docs Intel provided recently are wrong.) > > > > You should use your mainboard's sensors instead for accurate values. > > I'm actually using k8temp. Do you think it is susceptible to the same > problems you're talking about? I also have an ACPI sensor available > named THRM. Should that one be more accurate? > > BTW, another system of mine (Dell laptop) only seems to have available > coretemp or an ACPI sensor which reports values like 46960 mWh. Am I > totally out of luck with that one? > > So, In the end, it's fairly impossible to monitor a CPU's actual > temperature in order to keep it below the published maximum? > > - Grant > there are no published maximums. Ruin a good evening going through CPU specs. And k8temp has the same problem. Or similar. Some CPUs report correct temps, other doesn't and some report some complete bogonium.