From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 18:13:19 +0000
Subject: Re: [lm-sensors] [PATCH 1/5] hwmon: (coretemp) Drop dependency on PCI for TjMax detection on Atom CP
Message-Id: <20121010181319.GA14317@roeck-us.net>
List-Id: <lm-sensors.vger.kernel.org>
References: <1349816943-17697-2-git-send-email-linux@roeck-us.net>
In-Reply-To: <1349816943-17697-2-git-send-email-linux@roeck-us.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
To: lm-sensors@vger.kernel.org

On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 07:00:39AM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 03:44:56PM +0200, Jean Delvare wrote:
> [ ... ]
> >=20
> > Documentation/hwmon/coretemp says 125=B0C for Atom 230 and 330. N5xx
> > aren't listed in this document BTW.
> >=20
> Reminds me ... we have a discrepancy in the code regarding the 230, and u=
se 100
> degrees C instead of 125 for it. Any idea where this is documented ? I wa=
sn't
> able to find definite numbers over the weekend, and I don't recall why I =
used
> 100 for the 230 when I introduced tjmax_table.
>=20
Followup on this after some more digging. Datasheets actually claim Tjmax f=
or
both 230 and 330 to be 90 degrees C. 125 degrees C is the shutdown temperat=
ure,
which is different (the N4xx/D4xx/D5xx also have a shutdown temperature of =
125
degrees C). We do know that we have to use Tjmax of 125 C for the 330 for s=
omewhat
reasonable temperature readings. So the big remaining question is which
temperature is used as calibration point for the 230.

Thanks,
Guenter

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