* Re: [lm-sensors] Config for MSI X58 Pro-E (MS-7522)
2010-08-18 15:26 [lm-sensors] Config for MSI X58 Pro-E (MS-7522) Olaf Mandel
@ 2010-08-22 12:38 ` Jean Delvare
2010-08-22 13:13 ` Olaf Mandel
` (3 subsequent siblings)
4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Jean Delvare @ 2010-08-22 12:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: lm-sensors
Hi Olaf,
On Wed, 18 Aug 2010 17:26:02 +0200, Olaf Mandel wrote:
> this is a partial configuration file for the MSI X58 Pro-E (MS-7522)
> motherboard, in case someone else has the board. It works for me, but is
> unfortunately incomplete:
>
> * The System1 fan could be on either fan2 or fan3
This should be easy enough to verify. You can temporarily unplug any
system fan (or slow it down by pressing your finger on the middle part -
don't get hurt), and see which reported speed drops.
> * There are several 3.3V inputs, but which one corresponds to the one
> shown in the BIOS?
Most certainly in0. in7 is 3VSB (Stand-By 3.3V) and in8 is Vbat
(battery). It's quite rare that BIOS reports these.
> * The calibration values for in1, in4 and in5 are only approximations
> * No min, max or critical values are given here.
Easy enough to add once you are certain your configuration is OK.
> =¾GIN sensors3.conf=> # configuration for the Fintek f71882fg as used on the MSI X58 Pro-E (MS-7522)
> chip "f71882fg-*"
>
> # Temperature
> label temp1 "CPU"
> label temp2 "IOH"
> label temp3 "System"
>
> # Fans
> label fan1 "CPU"
> label fan2 "System 1" # This is not confirmed
> label fan3 "System 2"
> ignore fan4
No 4th fan header, or just unused on your system? You should only
ignore a fan when the header isn't there.
>
> # Voltage
> label in0 "3.3V" # Which of these three to use?
> label in1 "Vcore"
> ignore in2
> ignore in3
> label in4 "5V"
> label in5 "12V"
> ignore in6
> label in7 "3.3V" # Which of these three to use?
> label in8 "3.3V" # Which of these three to use?
The following labels, taken from sensors.conf.default, are clearer:
label in7 "3VSB"
label in8 "Vbat"
> compute in0 (@ * 2), (@ / 2) # Hardwired in chip, don't change
> compute in1 (@ * 1.35), (@ / 1.35)
This would be quite surprising. On recent CPUs, Vcore is always lower
than the ADC's resolution, so it shouldn't need any scaling. How did
you come with this value?
> compute in4 (@ * 5.25), (@ / 5.25)
> compute in5 (@ * 10.9), (@ / 10.9)
> compute in7 (@ * 2), (@ / 2) # Hardwired in chip, don't change
> compute in8 (@ * 2), (@ / 2) # Hardwired in chip, don't change
> ==End sensors3.conf=
When sending such configuration files, it is a good practice to also
include the output of "sensors -c /dev/null", so that we can review
your choices and possibly help you improve your configuration file.
--
Jean Delvare
_______________________________________________
lm-sensors mailing list
lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org
http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* Re: [lm-sensors] Config for MSI X58 Pro-E (MS-7522)
2010-08-18 15:26 [lm-sensors] Config for MSI X58 Pro-E (MS-7522) Olaf Mandel
2010-08-22 12:38 ` Jean Delvare
@ 2010-08-22 13:13 ` Olaf Mandel
2010-08-22 14:13 ` Jean Delvare
` (2 subsequent siblings)
4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Olaf Mandel @ 2010-08-22 13:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: lm-sensors
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4759 bytes --]
Am 22.08.2010 14:38, schrieb Jean Delvare:
-Snipp-
> On Wed, 18 Aug 2010 17:26:02 +0200, Olaf Mandel wrote:
-Snipp-
>> * The System1 fan could be on either fan2 or fan3
>
> This should be easy enough to verify. You can temporarily unplug any
> system fan (or slow it down by pressing your finger on the middle part -
> don't get hurt), and see which reported speed drops.
>
Hi Jean,
unfortunately, I cannot do that: the motherboard is build into a
root-server I rented and is located in a remote location I have no
physical access to. I can ask for access to its monitor and keyboard via
a remote KVM solution in order to access the BIOS information, but that
is about the end of it. The server operator charges per 15min of "remote
hands", and I am to stingy to ask them to swap the fan connection.
>> * There are several 3.3V inputs, but which one corresponds to the one
>> shown in the BIOS?
>
> Most certainly in0. in7 is 3VSB (Stand-By 3.3V) and in8 is Vbat
> (battery). It's quite rare that BIOS reports these.
>
Thanks for the info. I have updated my configuration file accordingly.
>> * The calibration values for in1, in4 and in5 are only approximations
>> * No min, max or critical values are given here.
>
> Easy enough to add once you are certain your configuration is OK.
>
If you mean the thresholds: how does one decide on which values are
max/min, or critical?
-Snipp-
>> ignore fan4
>
> No 4th fan header, or just unused on your system? You should only
> ignore a fan when the header isn't there.
>
I checked the manual: there is a "System 3" Fan, but it does not seem to
have a Sensor connector (the pin is labeled "No Use" in the manual and
the BIOS does not report it).
-Snipp-
>> compute in1 (@ * 1.35), (@ / 1.35)
>
> This would be quite surprising. On recent CPUs, Vcore is always lower
> than the ADC's resolution, so it shouldn't need any scaling. How did
> you come with this value?
>
I ran several comparisons between readouts from the BIOS and running
sensors with a dummy configuration. Then I tweaked the compute values to
match as well as possible the BIOS values. I read in the BIOS (some
values were quite noisy):
CPU Vcore 1.224V
3.3V 3.376V
5V 4.961V
12V 12.144V
Vcore was very stable, so I tuned compute1 to match it. For compute5, I
did the same (even though the values varied slightly). I cannot
remember, whether I did the same to compute4 or stayed with the default.
-Snipp-
> When sending such configuration files, it is a good practice to also
> include the output of "sensors -c /dev/null", so that we can review
> your choices and possibly help you improve your configuration file.
>
Sure (the long "sensor = ..." lines get folded by my MUA):
unloaded machine:
f71882fg-isa-0a00
Adapter: ISA adapter
in0: +1.70 V
in1: +0.92 V (max = +2.04 V)
in2: +0.02 V
in3: +0.00 V
in4: +0.94 V
in5: +1.11 V
in6: +0.21 V
in7: +1.68 V
in8: +1.63 V
fan1: 2407 RPM
fan2: 0 RPM ALARM
fan3: 1758 RPM
fan4: 0 RPM ALARM
temp1: +22.0°C (high = +255.0°C, hyst = +251.0°C)
(crit = +255.0°C, hyst = +251.0°C) sensor = Intel
PECI
temp2: +59.0°C (high = +255.0°C, hyst = +251.0°C)
(crit = +255.0°C, hyst = +251.0°C) sensor =
transistor
temp3: +44.0°C (high = +255.0°C, hyst = +253.0°C)
(crit = +255.0°C, hyst = +253.0°C) sensor =
transistor
machine loaded by 8 instances of burnK7:
f71882fg-isa-0a00
Adapter: ISA adapter
in0: +1.68 V
in1: +1.12 V (max = +2.04 V)
in2: +0.48 V
in3: +0.29 V
in4: +0.94 V
in5: +1.10 V
in6: +0.52 V
in7: +1.68 V
in8: +1.63 V
fan1: 2407 RPM
fan2: 0 RPM ALARM
fan3: 1706 RPM
fan4: 0 RPM ALARM
temp1: +78.0°C (high = +255.0°C, hyst = +251.0°C)
(crit = +255.0°C, hyst = +251.0°C) sensor = Intel
PECI
temp2: +65.0°C (high = +255.0°C, hyst = +251.0°C)
(crit = +255.0°C, hyst = +251.0°C) sensor =
transistor
temp3: +43.0°C (high = +255.0°C, hyst = +253.0°C)
(crit = +255.0°C, hyst = +253.0°C) sensor =
transistor
Any further suggestions on how to tweak the warning levels for all the
settings?
Best regards,
Olaf Mandel
--
Olaf Mandel <olaf@mandel.name> <http://www.olaf.mandel.name/>
PGP key: 1024D/33398848 2002-09-19
Fingerprint: 0E33 BEA6 1A71 9C5E 62BD FC0E 99A7 D2C6 3339 8848
[-- Attachment #1.2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 153 bytes --]
_______________________________________________
lm-sensors mailing list
lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org
http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* Re: [lm-sensors] Config for MSI X58 Pro-E (MS-7522)
2010-08-18 15:26 [lm-sensors] Config for MSI X58 Pro-E (MS-7522) Olaf Mandel
2010-08-22 12:38 ` Jean Delvare
2010-08-22 13:13 ` Olaf Mandel
@ 2010-08-22 14:13 ` Jean Delvare
2010-08-30 17:32 ` Olaf Mandel
2010-09-04 12:23 ` Jean Delvare
4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Jean Delvare @ 2010-08-22 14:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: lm-sensors
On Sun, 22 Aug 2010 15:13:05 +0200, Olaf Mandel wrote:
> Am 22.08.2010 14:38, schrieb Jean Delvare:
> -Snipp-
> > On Wed, 18 Aug 2010 17:26:02 +0200, Olaf Mandel wrote:
> -Snipp-
> >> * The System1 fan could be on either fan2 or fan3
> >
> > This should be easy enough to verify. You can temporarily unplug any
> > system fan (or slow it down by pressing your finger on the middle part -
> > don't get hurt), and see which reported speed drops.
> >
> Hi Jean,
>
> unfortunately, I cannot do that: the motherboard is build into a
> root-server I rented and is located in a remote location I have no
> physical access to. I can ask for access to its monitor and keyboard via
> a remote KVM solution in order to access the BIOS information, but that
> is about the end of it. The server operator charges per 15min of "remote
> hands", and I am to stingy to ask them to swap the fan connection.
OK, I get the situation better now.
> >> * There are several 3.3V inputs, but which one corresponds to the one
> >> shown in the BIOS?
> >
> > Most certainly in0. in7 is 3VSB (Stand-By 3.3V) and in8 is Vbat
> > (battery). It's quite rare that BIOS reports these.
> >
> Thanks for the info. I have updated my configuration file accordingly.
>
> >> * The calibration values for in1, in4 and in5 are only approximations
> >> * No min, max or critical values are given here.
> >
> > Easy enough to add once you are certain your configuration is OK.
> >
> If you mean the thresholds: how does one decide on which values are
> max/min, or critical?
Oh, now I remember that the Fintek F71882FG is actually quite limited
when it comes to thresholds: only temperatures, and in1, support them.
For voltages, you typically set min to -5% of nominal and max to +5% of
nominal. For temperatures, it depends a lot of your CPU, case, cooling,
usage and expectations. Assuming your system works fine, the idea would
be to set the high limit somewhat higher to the maximum values you've
seen so far. And critical to an arbitrary limit you want to be sure you
never hit.
> -Snipp-
> >> ignore fan4
> >
> > No 4th fan header, or just unused on your system? You should only
> > ignore a fan when the header isn't there.
> >
> I checked the manual: there is a "System 3" Fan, but it does not seem to
> have a Sensor connector (the pin is labeled "No Use" in the manual and
> the BIOS does not report it).
>
> -Snipp-
> >> compute in1 (@ * 1.35), (@ / 1.35)
> >
> > This would be quite surprising. On recent CPUs, Vcore is always lower
> > than the ADC's resolution, so it shouldn't need any scaling. How did
> > you come with this value?
> >
>
> I ran several comparisons between readouts from the BIOS and running
> sensors with a dummy configuration. Then I tweaked the compute values to
> match as well as possible the BIOS values. I read in the BIOS (some
> values were quite noisy):
Noisy values are very useful for that kind of exercise. If the BIOS
reports enough different values for a given voltage line, you can guess
the scaling factor without even comparing with the values reported by
"sensors". And it is more reliable than comparing voltages of the same
machine under different workloads...
> CPU Vcore 1.224V
> 3.3V 3.376V
> 5V 4.961V
> 12V 12.144V
>
> Vcore was very stable, so I tuned compute1 to match it. For compute5, I
> did the same (even though the values varied slightly). I cannot
> remember, whether I did the same to compute4 or stayed with the default.
The problem is that you compared the Vcore in BIOS, without CPU
frequency scaling, with Vcore in sensors, with CPU frequency scaling
enabled (as can be seen from the two outputs below.) This isn't fair!
If you compare with Linux underload instead, you see Vcore (unscaled)
at 1.12 V. This is definitely not 35% off compared to the BIOS's report
of 1.224 V. To be honest, I would have expected both values to match
exactly. I get to suspect that your Linux system is configured to
prevent the CPU to enter the highest frequency states, you may want to
check this.
Anyway, again, 1.224 V is way below the ACD's range (2.04 V), so
there is no reason why the board vendor would spend 2 resistors to
scale down the voltage value. Thus I still don't think in1 needs a
compute line (and the fact that 1.224 is a multiple of 0.008, the ADC's
resolution, suggests I'm right). The difference in values has to have a
different explanation.
> -Snipp-
> > When sending such configuration files, it is a good practice to also
> > include the output of "sensors -c /dev/null", so that we can review
> > your choices and possibly help you improve your configuration file.
> >
>
> Sure (the long "sensor = ..." lines get folded by my MUA):
>
> unloaded machine:
> f71882fg-isa-0a00
> Adapter: ISA adapter
> in0: +1.70 V
> in1: +0.92 V (max = +2.04 V)
> in2: +0.02 V
> in3: +0.00 V
> in4: +0.94 V
> in5: +1.11 V
> in6: +0.21 V
> in7: +1.68 V
> in8: +1.63 V
> fan1: 2407 RPM
> fan2: 0 RPM ALARM
> fan3: 1758 RPM
> fan4: 0 RPM ALARM
> temp1: +22.0°C (high = +255.0°C, hyst = +251.0°C)
> (crit = +255.0°C, hyst = +251.0°C) sensor = Intel PECI
> temp2: +59.0°C (high = +255.0°C, hyst = +251.0°C)
> (crit = +255.0°C, hyst = +251.0°C) sensor = transistor
> temp3: +44.0°C (high = +255.0°C, hyst = +253.0°C)
> (crit = +255.0°C, hyst = +253.0°C) sensor = transistor
>
> machine loaded by 8 instances of burnK7:
> f71882fg-isa-0a00
> Adapter: ISA adapter
> in0: +1.68 V
> in1: +1.12 V (max = +2.04 V)
> in2: +0.48 V
> in3: +0.29 V
> in4: +0.94 V
> in5: +1.10 V
> in6: +0.52 V
> in7: +1.68 V
> in8: +1.63 V
> fan1: 2407 RPM
> fan2: 0 RPM ALARM
> fan3: 1706 RPM
> fan4: 0 RPM ALARM
> temp1: +78.0°C (high = +255.0°C, hyst = +251.0°C)
> (crit = +255.0°C, hyst = +251.0°C) sensor = Intel PECI
> temp2: +65.0°C (high = +255.0°C, hyst = +251.0°C)
> (crit = +255.0°C, hyst = +251.0°C) sensor = transistor
> temp3: +43.0°C (high = +255.0°C, hyst = +253.0°C)
> (crit = +255.0°C, hyst = +253.0°C) sensor = transistor
>
Your CPU cooling seems insufficient. A 56°C difference between idle and
load is very, very much. I'd be worried.
> Any further suggestions on how to tweak the warning levels for all the
> settings?
I would suggest the following, but again this is quite subjective, feel
free to adjust. I don't know what you're using the machine for...
set in1_max 1.3
set temp1_max 85
set temp1_max_hyst 82
set temp1_crit 100
set temp1_crit_hyst 97
set temp2_max 75
set temp2_max_hyst 72
set temp2_crit 85
set temp2_crit_hyst 82
set temp3_max 55
set temp3_max_hyst 52
set temp3_crit 65
set temp3_crit_hyst 62
When you have come up with a "final" configuration file, please send it
over, and I'll put it on the wiki.
--
Jean Delvare
_______________________________________________
lm-sensors mailing list
lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org
http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [lm-sensors] Config for MSI X58 Pro-E (MS-7522)
2010-08-18 15:26 [lm-sensors] Config for MSI X58 Pro-E (MS-7522) Olaf Mandel
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2010-08-22 14:13 ` Jean Delvare
@ 2010-08-30 17:32 ` Olaf Mandel
2010-09-04 12:23 ` Jean Delvare
4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Olaf Mandel @ 2010-08-30 17:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: lm-sensors
[-- Attachment #1.1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1873 bytes --]
Am 22.08.2010 16:13, schrieb Jean Delvare:
> On Sun, 22 Aug 2010 15:13:05 +0200, Olaf Mandel wrote:
-Snipp-
>
> The problem is that you compared the Vcore in BIOS, without CPU
> frequency scaling, with Vcore in sensors, with CPU frequency scaling
> enabled (as can be seen from the two outputs below.) This isn't fair!
>
Hi Jean,
I have to agree, the previous compute line was wrong.
> If you compare with Linux underload instead, you see Vcore (unscaled)
> at 1.12 V. This is definitely not 35% off compared to the BIOS's report
> of 1.224 V. To be honest, I would have expected both values to match
> exactly. I get to suspect that your Linux system is configured to
> prevent the CPU to enter the highest frequency states, you may want to
> check this.
>
That was indeed the case: thermal_throttle was limiting the clock speed.
I checked the voltage by setting the clock speed manually and it gets at
least closer.
-Snipp-
>
> Your CPU cooling seems insufficient. A 56°C difference between idle and
> load is very, very much. I'd be worried.
>
It only gets hot if I run many instances of burnK7. If I just up the
clock speed, it doesn't get hot.
-Snipp-
> When you have come up with a "final" configuration file, please send it
> over, and I'll put it on the wiki.
>
Ok, it's attached to the mail. It remained nearly unchanged, except for
the compute lines and the limits you suggested. The two non-trivial
compute lines are taken from comparison of values (BIOS<->sensors) and
then searching the nearest simple voltage divider that would work. The
values are pure guesses!
Thank you again for your help!
Best regards,
Olaf Mandel
--
Olaf Mandel <olaf@mandel.name> <http://www.olaf.mandel.name/>
PGP key: 1024D/33398848 2002-09-19
Fingerprint: 0E33 BEA6 1A71 9C5E 62BD FC0E 99A7 D2C6 3339 8848
[-- Attachment #1.1.2: sensors.conf --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 1278 bytes --]
# configuration for the Fintek f71882fg as used on the MSI X58 Pro-E (MS-7522)
chip "f71882fg-*"
# Temperature
label temp1 "CPU"
label temp2 "IOH"
label temp3 "System"
# Fans
label fan1 "CPU"
label fan2 "System 1" # This is not confirmed
label fan3 "System 2"
ignore fan2
ignore fan4
# Voltage
label in0 "3.3V"
label in1 "Vcore"
ignore in2
ignore in3
label in4 "5V"
label in5 "12V"
ignore in6
label in7 "3VSB"
label in8 "Vbat"
compute in0 (@ * 2), (@ / 2) # Hardwired in chip, don't change
compute in1 @, @
compute in4 (@ * 5.25), (@ / 5.25) # E24: (12 + 51) / 12
compute in5 (@ * 11), (@ / 11) # E6: ( 1 + 10) / 1
compute in7 (@ * 2), (@ / 2) # Hardwired in chip, don't change
compute in8 (@ * 2), (@ / 2) # Hardwired in chip, don't change
# Thresholds
set in1_max 1.3
set temp1_max 85
set temp1_max_hyst 82
set temp1_crit 100
set temp1_crit_hyst 97
set temp2_max 75
set temp2_max_hyst 72
set temp2_crit 85
set temp2_crit_hyst 82
set temp3_max 55
set temp3_max_hyst 52
set temp3_crit 65
set temp3_crit_hyst 62
[-- Attachment #1.2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 153 bytes --]
_______________________________________________
lm-sensors mailing list
lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org
http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* Re: [lm-sensors] Config for MSI X58 Pro-E (MS-7522)
2010-08-18 15:26 [lm-sensors] Config for MSI X58 Pro-E (MS-7522) Olaf Mandel
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2010-08-30 17:32 ` Olaf Mandel
@ 2010-09-04 12:23 ` Jean Delvare
4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Jean Delvare @ 2010-09-04 12:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: lm-sensors
On Mon, 30 Aug 2010 19:32:57 +0200, Olaf Mandel wrote:
> Am 22.08.2010 16:13, schrieb Jean Delvare:
> > On Sun, 22 Aug 2010 15:13:05 +0200, Olaf Mandel wrote:
> -Snipp-
> >
> > The problem is that you compared the Vcore in BIOS, without CPU
> > frequency scaling, with Vcore in sensors, with CPU frequency scaling
> > enabled (as can be seen from the two outputs below.) This isn't fair!
> >
> Hi Jean,
>
> I have to agree, the previous compute line was wrong.
>
> > If you compare with Linux underload instead, you see Vcore (unscaled)
> > at 1.12 V. This is definitely not 35% off compared to the BIOS's report
> > of 1.224 V. To be honest, I would have expected both values to match
> > exactly. I get to suspect that your Linux system is configured to
> > prevent the CPU to enter the highest frequency states, you may want to
> > check this.
> >
> That was indeed the case: thermal_throttle was limiting the clock speed.
> I checked the voltage by setting the clock speed manually and it gets at
> least closer.
>
> -Snipp-
> >
> > Your CPU cooling seems insufficient. A 56°C difference between idle and
> > load is very, very much. I'd be worried.
> >
> It only gets hot if I run many instances of burnK7. If I just up the
> clock speed, it doesn't get hot.
>
> -Snipp-
> > When you have come up with a "final" configuration file, please send it
> > over, and I'll put it on the wiki.
> >
>
> Ok, it's attached to the mail. It remained nearly unchanged, except for
> the compute lines and the limits you suggested. The two non-trivial
> compute lines are taken from comparison of values (BIOS<->sensors) and
> then searching the nearest simple voltage divider that would work. The
> values are pure guesses!
>
> Thank you again for your help!
You're welcome. Thanks for your contribution, I've added it to the wiki:
http://www.lm-sensors.org/wiki/Configurations/MSI/X58-Pro-E
--
Jean Delvare
_______________________________________________
lm-sensors mailing list
lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org
http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread