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 1N2VUV-0002Lt-Dw for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 26 Oct 2009 19:44:32 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id DCA69E0833; Mon, 26 Oct 2009 19:44:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-pw0-f47.google.com (mail-pw0-f47.google.com [209.85.160.47]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A0F45E0833 for ; Mon, 26 Oct 2009 19:44:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: by pwj10 with SMTP id 10so3507736pwj.26 for ; Mon, 26 Oct 2009 12:44:29 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=6qyovtafT9FZT4LWeR0L+W4MUr7xlPb3I9F7zbRRboY=; b=LjQOBDNShqxGBdQvbt6eyWYvyIKwZXogWW6sE6D0Neiicjq5tj6BDTYmUtfGYlmKU7 y/RiD/EJ5//XQDTq9bRLmQ6s1sx/vah+lhPmqErlzgSenckvlQ/yH4+xKSrTPdR0rXXZ tjFrvr5TiTfyYxw0KLJOg1XbGXHzNKflWDw04= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=AOCXX7Xx8ZBZXN5IQH6pzrhaoryz+Uaq8w/MEpRfP1FnNla4A62Cik9JIgBTEtn2B6 hYaiCvmsbor+xBGQMedHOvQkWeN/FGeG2Vb+VyY/bOLmZPF40pGSTa58qok540A2NT1r jTaqyrLShvB1x1924GC0BUJO//pWffT4nNCbg= 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 Received: by 10.115.100.4 with SMTP id c4mr23308603wam.13.1256586268536; Mon, 26 Oct 2009 12:44:28 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <49bf44f10910251437q530ddecdv4a669d2587e70f79@mail.gmail.com> Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 12:44:28 -0700 Message-ID: <49bf44f10910261244q218add8araa11fb56c7998d52@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: lm_sensors much hotter in 2.6.31 than 2.6.28 From: Grant To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: d06d0d4f-1561-4d4a-a525-dc4cd43c371a X-Archives-Hash: a3c188da9134ac35a71d56fc3b088e04 >> After upgrading from 2.6.28 to 2.6.31, I noticed my CPU temperatures >> are reported a full 20C hotter. =A0If I load the old kernel, the >> reported temperatures drops back down to normal. =A0Has anyone else seen >> this? > > If you're using coretemp as sensor, the temps are always off (the coretem= p > sensor of Intel chips is not accurate, not by any stretch of the > imagination.) =A0It only reports the distance to the CPU's maximum therma= l > 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). =A0That maximum value is totally undocumented for desktop CPUs (t= he > 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