All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org>
To: Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>
Cc: Guenter Roeck <guenter.roeck@ericsson.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@linux.intel.com>,
	"Brown, Len" <len.brown@intel.com>,
	Chen Gong <gong.chen@linux.intel.com>,
	"Wan, Huaxu" <huaxu.wan@intel.com>,
	lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org" <lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org>
Subject: Re: [lm-sensors] [PATCH 5/5] Package Level Thermal Control and
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2010 08:33:56 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100820103356.01c9907f@hyperion.delvare> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100819205120.GA22602@linux-os.sc.intel.com>

Fenghua,

On Thu, 19 Aug 2010 13:51:20 -0700, Fenghua Yu wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 09:27:19AM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > I might spend some time rewriting the coretemp driver as described above,
> > unless someone else picks it up, and unless there is opposition. 
> > Obviously, that won't include the package sensor since there is now
> > a separate driver for it.
>
> I agree with this method too. On a multiple socket system, the current coretemp
> output will cause confusion since it only outputs core# without package#.

Good point.

> If it's ok for you, I can rewrite this part to have hwmon device per CPU with
> both core and package thermal info and send out RFC patch soon.

Yes, please! If you have time to work on this, it would be very great.
I am really curious to see how the driver would look like if we go with
this approach. I can test the code, too (although I understand you
won't have any difficulties getting your hands on recent Intel
systems ;)

Also see my reply in the other thread about the handling of removed
siblings. I suspect it will be very easy to add to the new design.

Side question: is it safe to assume a maximum of 2 siblings per core on
Intel x86 CPUs?

-- 
Jean Delvare

_______________________________________________
lm-sensors mailing list
lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org
http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org>
To: Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>
Cc: Guenter Roeck <guenter.roeck@ericsson.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@linux.intel.com>,
	"Brown, Len" <len.brown@intel.com>,
	Chen Gong <gong.chen@linux.intel.com>,
	"Wan, Huaxu" <huaxu.wan@intel.com>,
	lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org" <lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] Package Level Thermal Control and Power Limit Notification: pkgtemp doc
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2010 10:33:56 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100820103356.01c9907f@hyperion.delvare> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100819205120.GA22602@linux-os.sc.intel.com>

Fenghua,

On Thu, 19 Aug 2010 13:51:20 -0700, Fenghua Yu wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 09:27:19AM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > I might spend some time rewriting the coretemp driver as described above,
> > unless someone else picks it up, and unless there is opposition. 
> > Obviously, that won't include the package sensor since there is now
> > a separate driver for it.
>
> I agree with this method too. On a multiple socket system, the current coretemp
> output will cause confusion since it only outputs core# without package#.

Good point.

> If it's ok for you, I can rewrite this part to have hwmon device per CPU with
> both core and package thermal info and send out RFC patch soon.

Yes, please! If you have time to work on this, it would be very great.
I am really curious to see how the driver would look like if we go with
this approach. I can test the code, too (although I understand you
won't have any difficulties getting your hands on recent Intel
systems ;)

Also see my reply in the other thread about the handling of removed
siblings. I suspect it will be very easy to add to the new design.

Side question: is it safe to assume a maximum of 2 siblings per core on
Intel x86 CPUs?

-- 
Jean Delvare

  parent reply	other threads:[~2010-08-20  8:33 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <94E56C79ECC49A4B87113985F1FEBA8D03F8AE2A4B@bgsmsx502.gar.corp.intel.com>
     [not found] ` <4C485DF1.5050407@linux.intel.com>
2010-07-22 16:21   ` [lm-sensors] [PATCH 1/5] Package Level Thermal Control and Power Fenghua Yu
2010-07-22 16:21     ` [PATCH 1/5] Package Level Thermal Control and Power Limit Notification: feature enabling Fenghua Yu
2010-07-22 16:21   ` [lm-sensors] [PATCH 2/5] Package Level Thermal Control and Power Fenghua Yu
2010-07-22 16:21     ` [PATCH 2/5] Package Level Thermal Control and Power Limit Notification: pkgtemp hwmon driver Fenghua Yu
2010-07-22 16:22   ` [lm-sensors] [PATCH 3/5] Package Level Thermal Control and Power Fenghua Yu
2010-07-22 16:22     ` [PATCH 3/5] Package Level Thermal Control and Power Limit Notification: thermal throttling Fenghua Yu
2010-07-22 16:22   ` [lm-sensors] [PATCH 4/5] Package Level Thermal Control and Power Fenghua Yu
2010-07-22 16:22     ` [PATCH 4/5] Package Level Thermal Control and Power Limit Notification: power limit notification Fenghua Yu
2010-07-22 16:22   ` [lm-sensors] [PATCH 5/5] Package Level Thermal Control and Power Fenghua Yu
2010-07-22 16:22     ` [PATCH 5/5] Package Level Thermal Control and Power Limit Notification: pkgtemp doc Fenghua Yu
2010-07-22 17:27     ` [lm-sensors] [PATCH 5/5] Package Level Thermal Control and Guenter Roeck
2010-07-22 17:27       ` [PATCH 5/5] Package Level Thermal Control and Power Limit Notification: pkgtemp doc Guenter Roeck
2010-07-22 17:52       ` [lm-sensors] [PATCH 5/5] Package Level Thermal Control and Fenghua Yu
2010-07-22 17:52         ` [PATCH 5/5] Package Level Thermal Control and Power Limit Notification: pkgtemp doc Fenghua Yu
2010-07-22 18:58         ` [lm-sensors] [PATCH 5/5] Package Level Thermal Control and Guenter Roeck
2010-07-22 18:58           ` [PATCH 5/5] Package Level Thermal Control and Power Limit Notification: pkgtemp doc Guenter Roeck
2010-07-22 21:21           ` [lm-sensors] [PATCH 5/5] Package Level Thermal Control and Fenghua Yu
2010-07-22 21:21             ` [PATCH 5/5] Package Level Thermal Control and Power Limit Notification: pkgtemp doc Fenghua Yu
2010-08-19 15:46             ` [lm-sensors] [PATCH 5/5] Package Level Thermal Control and Jean Delvare
2010-08-19 15:46               ` [PATCH 5/5] Package Level Thermal Control and Power Limit Notification: pkgtemp doc Jean Delvare
2010-08-19 16:27               ` [lm-sensors] [PATCH 5/5] Package Level Thermal Control and Guenter Roeck
2010-08-19 16:27                 ` [PATCH 5/5] Package Level Thermal Control and Power Limit Notification: pkgtemp doc Guenter Roeck
2010-08-19 20:51                 ` [lm-sensors] [PATCH 5/5] Package Level Thermal Control and Fenghua Yu
2010-08-19 20:51                   ` [PATCH 5/5] Package Level Thermal Control and Power Limit Notification: pkgtemp doc Fenghua Yu
2010-08-19 21:06                   ` [lm-sensors] [PATCH 5/5] Package Level Thermal Control and Guenter Roeck
2010-08-19 21:06                     ` [PATCH 5/5] Package Level Thermal Control and Power Limit Notification: pkgtemp doc Guenter Roeck
2010-08-20  8:33                   ` Jean Delvare [this message]
2010-08-20  8:33                     ` Jean Delvare
2010-08-20 16:58                     ` [lm-sensors] [PATCH 5/5] Package Level Thermal Control and Fenghua Yu
2010-08-20 16:58                       ` [PATCH 5/5] Package Level Thermal Control and Power Limit Notification: pkgtemp doc Fenghua Yu
2010-08-20 18:39                     ` [lm-sensors] [PATCH 5/5] Package Level Thermal Control and H. Peter Anvin
2010-08-20 18:39                       ` [PATCH 5/5] Package Level Thermal Control and Power Limit Notification: pkgtemp doc H. Peter Anvin
2010-08-21 10:02                   ` [lm-sensors] [PATCH 5/5] Package Level Thermal Control and Jean Delvare
2010-08-21 10:02                     ` [PATCH 5/5] Package Level Thermal Control and Power Limit Notification: pkgtemp doc Jean Delvare

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20100820103356.01c9907f@hyperion.delvare \
    --to=khali@linux-fr.org \
    --cc=fenghua.yu@intel.com \
    --cc=gong.chen@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=guenter.roeck@ericsson.com \
    --cc=hpa@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=huaxu.wan@intel.com \
    --cc=len.brown@intel.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.