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 1N2R7w-00015H-EZ for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 26 Oct 2009 15:04:56 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 2A8C0E0678; Mon, 26 Oct 2009 15:04:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 07A17E0678 for ; Mon, 26 Oct 2009 15:04:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E2CF6744D for ; Mon, 26 Oct 2009 15:04:54 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at gentoo.org X-Spam-Score: -3.164 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.164 required=5.5 tests=[AWL=-0.565, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from smtp.gentoo.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.gentoo.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id UT3mVJFEJpzb for ; Mon, 26 Oct 2009 15:04:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lo.gmane.org (lo.gmane.org [80.91.229.12]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED70E67407 for ; Mon, 26 Oct 2009 15:04:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1N2R7e-00071Q-Eh for gentoo-user@gentoo.org; Mon, 26 Oct 2009 16:04:38 +0100 Received: from athedsl-374431.home.otenet.gr ([79.131.14.157]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 26 Oct 2009 16:04:38 +0100 Received: from realnc by athedsl-374431.home.otenet.gr with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 26 Oct 2009 16:04:38 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org From: Nikos Chantziaras Subject: [gentoo-user] Re: lm_sensors much hotter in 2.6.31 than 2.6.28 Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 17:04:13 +0200 Organization: Lucas Barks Message-ID: References: <49bf44f10910251437q530ddecdv4a669d2587e70f79@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; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: athedsl-374431.home.otenet.gr User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.4pre) Gecko/20091019 Thunderbird/3.0b4 In-Reply-To: <49bf44f10910251437q530ddecdv4a669d2587e70f79@mail.gmail.com> Sender: news X-Archives-Salt: e3ac9f61-6cce-4d00-bb52-37769b84258f X-Archives-Hash: 619c406e58e1f4e8802274a6e05edccf On 10/25/2009 11:37 PM, 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.