[lm-sensors] Specific configurations - Gigabyte mainboard

[lm-sensors] Specific configurations - Gigabyte mainboard

[Hubert Kario]

Hello everybody!
I've created a mainboard specific configuration for Gigabyte EP45-DS3P:

== snip =chip "it87-*" "it8712-*" "it8716-*" "it8718-*" "it8720-*"

        label in0 "Vcore"
        label in1 "Vram"
        label in2 "+3.3V"

        label in3 "+5V"
	# Standard resistor
        compute in3 @ * ( 6.8/10+1), @ / (6.8/10+1)

        ignore in4

        label in5 "+12V"
	# that's a bit weird, as the value (29.6) is close to typical resistor,
	# but it does give proper results (in line with what a multimeter
	# and BIOS show)
        compute in5 @ * (29.6/10+1), @ / (29.6/10+1)

        ignore in6

	# not sure about this one
        label in7 "5VSB"
        compute in7 @ * (6.8/10+1), @ / (6.8/10+1)

        label in8 "Vbat"

	# labels are after the ones printed on the mainboard
        label fan1 "CPU_FAN"
        label fan2 "SYS_FAN2"
        label fan3 "PWR_FAN"
        label fan4 "SYS_FAN1"

        label temp1 "Sys Temp"
        label temp2 "Tcase Temp"
        ignore temp3
== snip =
Hope it helps!
-- 
Hubert Kario
QBS - Quality Business Software
02-656 Warszawa, ul. Ksawerów 30/85
tel. +48 (22) 646-61-51, 646-74-24
www.qbs.com.pl

System Zarządzania Jakością
zgodny z normą ISO 9001:2000

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

Re: [lm-sensors] Specific configurations - Gigabyte mainboard

[Jean Delvare]

Hi Hubert,

On Sat, 9 May 2009 12:27:09 +0200, Hubert Kario wrote:
> Hello everybody!
> I've created a mainboard specific configuration for Gigabyte EP45-DS3P:
> 
> == snip => chip "it87-*" "it8712-*" "it8716-*" "it8718-*" "it8720-*"

Which actual IT87xxF chip does the EP45-DS3P have?

> 
>         label in0 "Vcore"
>         label in1 "Vram"
>         label in2 "+3.3V"
> 
>         label in3 "+5V"
> 	# Standard resistor
>         compute in3 @ * ( 6.8/10+1), @ / (6.8/10+1)
> 
>         ignore in4
> 
>         label in5 "+12V"
> 	# that's a bit weird, as the value (29.6) is close to typical resistor,
> 	# but it does give proper results (in line with what a multimeter
> 	# and BIOS show)

Could be that the 10 isn't correct. Not that it really matters
though... what matters is that the scaling factor is correct.

>         compute in5 @ * (29.6/10+1), @ / (29.6/10+1)
> 
>         ignore in6
> 
> 	# not sure about this one
>         label in7 "5VSB"
>         compute in7 @ * (6.8/10+1), @ / (6.8/10+1)
> 
>         label in8 "Vbat"
> 
> 	# labels are after the ones printed on the mainboard
>         label fan1 "CPU_FAN"
>         label fan2 "SYS_FAN2"
>         label fan3 "PWR_FAN"
>         label fan4 "SYS_FAN1"

These labels are ugly. What about:

        label fan1 "CPU Fan"
        label fan2 "Sys Fan 2"
        label fan3 "Power Fan"
        label fan4 "Sys Fan 2"


> 
>         label temp1 "Sys Temp"
>         label temp2 "Tcase Temp"

Why "Tcase" and not just "Case"?

>         ignore temp3
> == snip =
Yes it does, thanks for your contribution!

-- 
Jean Delvare

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

Re: [lm-sensors] Specific configurations - Gigabyte mainboard

[Hubert Kario]

On Monday 11 May 2009 13:17:22 you wrote:
> Hi Hubert,
>
> On Sat, 9 May 2009 12:27:09 +0200, Hubert Kario wrote:
> > Hello everybody!
> > I've created a mainboard specific configuration for Gigabyte EP45-DS3P:
> >
> > == snip => > chip "it87-*" "it8712-*" "it8716-*" "it8718-*" "it8720-*"
>
> Which actual IT87xxF chip does the EP45-DS3P have?
IT8720, I'll check when I'll be able to how it's visible by lspci/sensors, I 
don't know when it will be though, maybe today evening, maybe in a week's time
>
> >         label in0 "Vcore"
> >         label in1 "Vram"
> >         label in2 "+3.3V"
> >
> >         label in3 "+5V"
> > 	# Standard resistor
> >         compute in3 @ * ( 6.8/10+1), @ / (6.8/10+1)
> >
> >         ignore in4
> >
> >         label in5 "+12V"
> > 	# that's a bit weird, as the value (29.6) is close to typical resistor,
> > 	# but it does give proper results (in line with what a multimeter
> > 	# and BIOS show)
>
> Could be that the 10 isn't correct. Not that it really matters
> though... what matters is that the scaling factor is correct.
>
> >         compute in5 @ * (29.6/10+1), @ / (29.6/10+1)
> >
> >         ignore in6
> >
> > 	# not sure about this one
> >         label in7 "5VSB"
> >         compute in7 @ * (6.8/10+1), @ / (6.8/10+1)
> >
> >         label in8 "Vbat"
> >
> > 	# labels are after the ones printed on the mainboard
> >         label fan1 "CPU_FAN"
> >         label fan2 "SYS_FAN2"
> >         label fan3 "PWR_FAN"
> >         label fan4 "SYS_FAN1"
>
> These labels are ugly. What about:
yes, I know, but these are the exact ones that are printed on the mainboard...
and besides CPU_FAN, they can be connected to any fan one wishes (northbridge 
is passively cooled in this mainboard)
>
>         label fan1 "CPU Fan"
>         label fan2 "Sys Fan 2"
>         label fan3 "Power Fan"
>         label fan4 "Sys Fan 2"
>
> >         label temp1 "Sys Temp"
> >         label temp2 "Tcase Temp"
>
> Why "Tcase" and not just "Case"?
because it's the Tcase temp of a CPU (temperature of an IHS)

I bet "Case Temp" would be read as ambient temperature by most people 
(temperature inside the computer case), making it Tcase should clear the 
confusion, especially when after putting "tcase temp" to google one does 
recive "C2Q/C2D Temp Guide" as first result and "Tcase/Tjunction/Temp 
question" as second
>
> >         ignore temp3
> > == snip =>
> Yes it does, thanks for your contribution!
np

BTW, I couldn't use "compute" with "Core 0" and "Core 1" labels (I wanted to 
calibrate my core temperatures)
line:

 compute "Core 0" @ +3, @ -3

was completely ignored...
-- 
Hubert Kario
QBS - Quality Business Software
ul. Ksawerów 30/85
02-656 Warszawa
POLAND
tel. +48 (22) 646-61-51, 646-74-24
fax +48 (22) 646-61-50



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

Re: [lm-sensors] Specific configurations - Gigabyte mainboard

[Jean Delvare]

On Mon, 11 May 2009 14:57:57 +0200, Hubert Kario wrote:
> On Monday 11 May 2009 13:17:22 you wrote:  
> > Hi Hubert,
> >
> > On Sat, 9 May 2009 12:27:09 +0200, Hubert Kario wrote:  
> > > Hello everybody!
> > > I've created a mainboard specific configuration for Gigabyte EP45-DS3P:
> > >
> > > == snip => > > chip "it87-*" "it8712-*" "it8716-*" "it8718-*" "it8720-*"  
> >
> > Which actual IT87xxF chip does the EP45-DS3P have?  
> IT8720, I'll check when I'll be able to how it's visible by lspci/sensors, I 
> don't know when it will be though, maybe today evening, maybe in a week's time  

OK, no hurry. lspci won't show anything as this is not a PCI device.
sensors-detect should tell you.

> > >         label in0 "Vcore"
> > >         label in1 "Vram"
> > >         label in2 "+3.3V"
> > >
> > >         label in3 "+5V"
> > > 	# Standard resistor
> > >         compute in3 @ * ( 6.8/10+1), @ / (6.8/10+1)
> > >
> > >         ignore in4
> > >
> > >         label in5 "+12V"
> > > 	# that's a bit weird, as the value (29.6) is close to typical resistor,
> > > 	# but it does give proper results (in line with what a multimeter
> > > 	# and BIOS show)  
> >
> > Could be that the 10 isn't correct. Not that it really matters
> > though... what matters is that the scaling factor is correct.
> >  
> > >         compute in5 @ * (29.6/10+1), @ / (29.6/10+1)
> > >
> > >         ignore in6
> > >
> > > 	# not sure about this one
> > >         label in7 "5VSB"
> > >         compute in7 @ * (6.8/10+1), @ / (6.8/10+1)
> > >
> > >         label in8 "Vbat"
> > >
> > > 	# labels are after the ones printed on the mainboard
> > >         label fan1 "CPU_FAN"
> > >         label fan2 "SYS_FAN2"
> > >         label fan3 "PWR_FAN"
> > >         label fan4 "SYS_FAN1"  
> >
> > These labels are ugly. What about:  
>
> yes, I know, but these are the exact ones that are printed on the mainboard...
> and besides CPU_FAN, they can be connected to any fan one wishes (northbridge 
> is passively cooled in this mainboard)  

This is true of all (almost) motherboards out there. Still, we want to
present the inputs in a user-friendly way for users sticking to the
planned usage of the fan headers. Presumably, anyone able to diverge
from this will be able to adjust the configuration file accordingly.

> >
> >         label fan1 "CPU Fan"
> >         label fan2 "Sys Fan 2"
> >         label fan3 "Power Fan"
> >         label fan4 "Sys Fan 2"
> >  
> > >         label temp1 "Sys Temp"
> > >         label temp2 "Tcase Temp"  
> >
> > Why "Tcase" and not just "Case"?  
> because it's the Tcase temp of a CPU (temperature of an IHS)
> 
> I bet "Case Temp" would be read as ambient temperature by most people 
> (temperature inside the computer case), making it Tcase should clear the 
> confusion, especially when after putting "tcase temp" to google one does 
> recive "C2Q/C2D Temp Guide" as first result and "Tcase/Tjunction/Temp 
> question" as second  

Ah, OK. Then why not just "CPU Temp"? This would be much clearer. It's
not like you have other CPU temperature sensors on the chip.

> >  
> > >         ignore temp3
> > > == snip ==  
> >
> > Yes it does, thanks for your contribution!  
> np
> 
> BTW, I couldn't use "compute" with "Core 0" and "Core 1" labels (I wanted to 
> calibrate my core temperatures)
> line:
> 
>  compute "Core 0" @ +3, @ -3
> 
> was completely ignored...  

Compute statements take symbolic names, not labels, as their first
parameter. Try:

  compute temp1 @ +3, @ -3

-- 
Jean Delvare

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

Re: [lm-sensors] Specific configurations - Gigabyte mainboard

[Hubert Kario]

On Monday 11 May 2009 15:08:51 Jean Delvare wrote:
> On Mon, 11 May 2009 14:57:57 +0200, Hubert Kario wrote:
> > On Monday 11 May 2009 13:17:22 you wrote:
> > > Hi Hubert,
> > >
> > > On Sat, 9 May 2009 12:27:09 +0200, Hubert Kario wrote:
> > > > Hello everybody!
> > > > I've created a mainboard specific configuration for Gigabyte
> > > > EP45-DS3P:
> > > >
> > > > == snip => > > > chip "it87-*" "it8712-*" "it8716-*" "it8718-*" "it8720-*"
> > >
> > > Which actual IT87xxF chip does the EP45-DS3P have?
> >
> > IT8720, I'll check when I'll be able to how it's visible by
> > lspci/sensors, I don't know when it will be though, maybe today evening,
> > maybe in a week's time
>
> OK, no hurry. lspci won't show anything as this is not a PCI device.
> sensors-detect should tell you.
>
> > > >         label in0 "Vcore"
> > > >         label in1 "Vram"
> > > >         label in2 "+3.3V"
> > > >
> > > >         label in3 "+5V"
> > > > 	# Standard resistor
> > > >         compute in3 @ * ( 6.8/10+1), @ / (6.8/10+1)
> > > >
> > > >         ignore in4
> > > >
> > > >         label in5 "+12V"
> > > > 	# that's a bit weird, as the value (29.6) is close to typical
> > > > resistor, # but it does give proper results (in line with what a
> > > > multimeter # and BIOS show)
> > >
> > > Could be that the 10 isn't correct. Not that it really matters
> > > though... what matters is that the scaling factor is correct.
> > >
> > > >         compute in5 @ * (29.6/10+1), @ / (29.6/10+1)
> > > >
> > > >         ignore in6
> > > >
> > > > 	# not sure about this one
> > > >         label in7 "5VSB"
> > > >         compute in7 @ * (6.8/10+1), @ / (6.8/10+1)
> > > >
> > > >         label in8 "Vbat"
> > > >
> > > > 	# labels are after the ones printed on the mainboard
> > >
> > > These labels are ugly. What about:
> >
> > yes, I know, but these are the exact ones that are printed on the
> > mainboard... and besides CPU_FAN, they can be connected to any fan one
> > wishes (northbridge is passively cooled in this mainboard)
>
> This is true of all (almost) motherboards out there. Still, we want to
> present the inputs in a user-friendly way for users sticking to the
> planned usage of the fan headers. Presumably, anyone able to diverge
> from this will be able to adjust the configuration file accordingly.

I've seen somwhere an idea (probably in the archives) for lm-sensors to keep 
very mainboard specific configurations for all mainbords and copy apropriate 
config files to /etc/sensors.d depending on DMI values?

that's why I put there the exact same labels as the ones printed on the 
mainboard. 

we could make the labels human readable and in comments before each of them 
put the header label:

# CPU_FAN header 
label fan1 "CPU Fan"
# SYS_FAN2 header
label fan2 "Sys Fan 2"
# PWR_FAN header
label fan3 "Power Fan"
# SYS_FAN1 header
label fan4 "Sys Fan 1"

> > >
> > > >         label temp1 "Sys Temp"
> > > >         label temp2 "Tcase Temp"
> > >
> > > Why "Tcase" and not just "Case"?
> >
> > because it's the Tcase temp of a CPU (temperature of an IHS)
> >
> > I bet "Case Temp" would be read as ambient temperature by most people
> > (temperature inside the computer case), making it Tcase should clear the
> > confusion, especially when after putting "tcase temp" to google one does
> > recive "C2Q/C2D Temp Guide" as first result and "Tcase/Tjunction/Temp
> > question" as second
>
> Ah, OK. Then why not just "CPU Temp"? This would be much clearer. It's
> not like you have other CPU temperature sensors on the chip.

in every C2D are 3 temperature sensors, and in every Core 2 Quad a 5 ones:
one Tcase - temperature of the CPU casing (which max temperature is published 
by intel as the maximum safe operational temperature), this temperature is 
read by the mainboard using a sensor inside CPU die,
and Tjunction0, Tjunction1 for C2D and Tjunction0-4 for C2Q which is read 
using coretemp driver by CPU itself ─ those sensors are inside each core's 
hotspot and trigger emergency shutdown if CPU is overheating (usually around 
95-100°C), with highly overclocked CPUs the gradient between Tcase and 
Tjunction can reach 8-9°C ─ so rather substantial

as such there's not one CPU temperature to measure but several, this one is 
known as Tcase. 

oh, and one more thing - mobile CPUs don't have IHS, so they don't have Tcase, 
if sensors report a CPU Temp (not the coretemp ones) it's completely external 
to the CPU

>
> > > >         ignore temp3
> > > > == snip => > >
> > > Yes it does, thanks for your contribution!
> >
> > np
> >
> > BTW, I couldn't use "compute" with "Core 0" and "Core 1" labels (I wanted
> > to calibrate my core temperatures)
> > line:
> >
> >  compute "Core 0" @ +3, @ -3
> >
> > was completely ignored...
>
> Compute statements take symbolic names, not labels, as their first
> parameter. Try:
>
>   compute temp1 @ +3, @ -3

but there are no labels defined for coretemp to change temp1 to "Core 0", i'm 
confused...


-- 
Hubert Kario
QBS - Quality Business Software
ul. Ksawerów 30/85
02-656 Warszawa
POLAND
tel. +48 (22) 646-61-51, 646-74-24
fax +48 (22) 646-61-50


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

Re: [lm-sensors] Specific configurations - Gigabyte mainboard

[Charles]

Hello -)

Regards the discussion of fan labels, sometimes a functional description is
most useful (example "CPU casing") and sometimes a match for OEM label is
most useful (example "CPU_FAN").

Hence I have chosen to use both, especially as it has been convenient to use
the mobo fan ports in ways the OEM did not envisage.  Actual examples:
"Case exhaust (port CPU_FAN)"
"CPU cooler (port SYS_FAN1)"

Best

Charles

-----Original Message-----

Message: 4
Date: Mon, 11 May 2009 15:56:48 +0200
From: Hubert Kario <hka@qbs.com.pl>
Subject: Re: [lm-sensors] Specific configurations - Gigabyte mainboard
To: lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org
Message-ID: <200905111556.49007.hka@qbs.com.pl>
Content-Type: Text/Plain;  charset="utf-8"

On Monday 11 May 2009 15:08:51 Jean Delvare wrote:
> On Mon, 11 May 2009 14:57:57 +0200, Hubert Kario wrote:
> > On Monday 11 May 2009 13:17:22 you wrote:
> > > Hi Hubert,
> > >
> > > On Sat, 9 May 2009 12:27:09 +0200, Hubert Kario wrote:
> > > > Hello everybody!
> > > > I've created a mainboard specific configuration for Gigabyte
> > > > EP45-DS3P:
> > > >
> > > > == snip => > > > chip "it87-*" "it8712-*" "it8716-*" "it8718-*" "it8720-*"
> > >
> > > Which actual IT87xxF chip does the EP45-DS3P have?
> >
> > IT8720, I'll check when I'll be able to how it's visible by
> > lspci/sensors, I don't know when it will be though, maybe today evening,
> > maybe in a week's time
>
> OK, no hurry. lspci won't show anything as this is not a PCI device.
> sensors-detect should tell you.
>
> > > >         label in0 "Vcore"
> > > >         label in1 "Vram"
> > > >         label in2 "+3.3V"
> > > >
> > > >         label in3 "+5V"
> > > > 	# Standard resistor
> > > >         compute in3 @ * ( 6.8/10+1), @ / (6.8/10+1)
> > > >
> > > >         ignore in4
> > > >
> > > >         label in5 "+12V"
> > > > 	# that's a bit weird, as the value (29.6) is close to
typical
> > > > resistor, # but it does give proper results (in line with what a
> > > > multimeter # and BIOS show)
> > >
> > > Could be that the 10 isn't correct. Not that it really matters
> > > though... what matters is that the scaling factor is correct.
> > >
> > > >         compute in5 @ * (29.6/10+1), @ / (29.6/10+1)
> > > >
> > > >         ignore in6
> > > >
> > > > 	# not sure about this one
> > > >         label in7 "5VSB"
> > > >         compute in7 @ * (6.8/10+1), @ / (6.8/10+1)
> > > >
> > > >         label in8 "Vbat"
> > > >
> > > > 	# labels are after the ones printed on the mainboard
> > >
> > > These labels are ugly. What about:
> >
> > yes, I know, but these are the exact ones that are printed on the
> > mainboard... and besides CPU_FAN, they can be connected to any fan one
> > wishes (northbridge is passively cooled in this mainboard)
>
> This is true of all (almost) motherboards out there. Still, we want to
> present the inputs in a user-friendly way for users sticking to the
> planned usage of the fan headers. Presumably, anyone able to diverge
> from this will be able to adjust the configuration file accordingly.

I've seen somwhere an idea (probably in the archives) for lm-sensors to keep

very mainboard specific configurations for all mainbords and copy apropriate

config files to /etc/sensors.d depending on DMI values?

that's why I put there the exact same labels as the ones printed on the 
mainboard. 

we could make the labels human readable and in comments before each of them 
put the header label:

# CPU_FAN header 
label fan1 "CPU Fan"
# SYS_FAN2 header
label fan2 "Sys Fan 2"
# PWR_FAN header
label fan3 "Power Fan"
# SYS_FAN1 header
label fan4 "Sys Fan 1"

> > >
> > > >         label temp1 "Sys Temp"
> > > >         label temp2 "Tcase Temp"
> > >
> > > Why "Tcase" and not just "Case"?
> >
> > because it's the Tcase temp of a CPU (temperature of an IHS)
> >
> > I bet "Case Temp" would be read as ambient temperature by most people
> > (temperature inside the computer case), making it Tcase should clear the
> > confusion, especially when after putting "tcase temp" to google one does
> > recive "C2Q/C2D Temp Guide" as first result and "Tcase/Tjunction/Temp
> > question" as second
>
> Ah, OK. Then why not just "CPU Temp"? This would be much clearer. It's
> not like you have other CPU temperature sensors on the chip.

in every C2D are 3 temperature sensors, and in every Core 2 Quad a 5 ones:
one Tcase - temperature of the CPU casing (which max temperature is
published 
by intel as the maximum safe operational temperature), this temperature is 
read by the mainboard using a sensor inside CPU die,
and Tjunction0, Tjunction1 for C2D and Tjunction0-4 for C2Q which is read 
using coretemp driver by CPU itself ? those sensors are inside each core's 
hotspot and trigger emergency shutdown if CPU is overheating (usually around

95-100?C), with highly overclocked CPUs the gradient between Tcase and 
Tjunction can reach 8-9?C ? so rather substantial

as such there's not one CPU temperature to measure but several, this one is 
known as Tcase. 

oh, and one more thing - mobile CPUs don't have IHS, so they don't have
Tcase, 
if sensors report a CPU Temp (not the coretemp ones) it's completely
external 
to the CPU

>
> > > >         ignore temp3
> > > > == snip => > >
> > > Yes it does, thanks for your contribution!
> >
> > np
> >
> > BTW, I couldn't use "compute" with "Core 0" and "Core 1" labels (I
wanted
> > to calibrate my core temperatures)
> > line:
> >
> >  compute "Core 0" @ +3, @ -3
> >
> > was completely ignored...
>
> Compute statements take symbolic names, not labels, as their first
> parameter. Try:
>
>   compute temp1 @ +3, @ -3

but there are no labels defined for coretemp to change temp1 to "Core 0",
i'm 
confused...


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

Re: [lm-sensors] Specific configurations - Gigabyte mainboard

[Jean Delvare]

On Mon, 11 May 2009 15:56:48 +0200, Hubert Kario wrote:
> On Monday 11 May 2009 15:08:51 Jean Delvare wrote:
> > This is true of all (almost) motherboards out there. Still, we want to
> > present the inputs in a user-friendly way for users sticking to the
> > planned usage of the fan headers. Presumably, anyone able to diverge
> > from this will be able to adjust the configuration file accordingly.
> 
> I've seen somwhere an idea (probably in the archives) for lm-sensors to keep 
> very mainboard specific configurations for all mainbords and copy apropriate 
> config files to /etc/sensors.d depending on DMI values?

Yes, we have a long running plan like that.

> that's why I put there the exact same labels as the ones printed on the 
> mainboard. 
> 
> we could make the labels human readable and in comments before each of them 
> put the header label:
> 
> # CPU_FAN header 
> label fan1 "CPU Fan"
> # SYS_FAN2 header
> label fan2 "Sys Fan 2"
> # PWR_FAN header
> label fan3 "Power Fan"
> # SYS_FAN1 header
> label fan4 "Sys Fan 1"

Yes, this sounds reasonable.

> 
> > > >
> > > > >         label temp1 "Sys Temp"
> > > > >         label temp2 "Tcase Temp"
> > > >
> > > > Why "Tcase" and not just "Case"?
> > >
> > > because it's the Tcase temp of a CPU (temperature of an IHS)
> > >
> > > I bet "Case Temp" would be read as ambient temperature by most people
> > > (temperature inside the computer case), making it Tcase should clear the
> > > confusion, especially when after putting "tcase temp" to google one does
> > > recive "C2Q/C2D Temp Guide" as first result and "Tcase/Tjunction/Temp
> > > question" as second
> >
> > Ah, OK. Then why not just "CPU Temp"? This would be much clearer. It's
> > not like you have other CPU temperature sensors on the chip.
> 
> in every C2D are 3 temperature sensors, and in every Core 2 Quad a 5 ones:
> one Tcase - temperature of the CPU casing (which max temperature is published 
> by intel as the maximum safe operational temperature), this temperature is 
> read by the mainboard using a sensor inside CPU die,
> and Tjunction0, Tjunction1 for C2D and Tjunction0-4 for C2Q which is read 
> using coretemp driver by CPU itself ─ those sensors are inside each core's 
> hotspot and trigger emergency shutdown if CPU is overheating (usually around 
> 95-100°C), with highly overclocked CPUs the gradient between Tcase and 
> Tjunction can reach 8-9°C ─ so rather substantial
> 
> as such there's not one CPU temperature to measure but several, this one is 
> known as Tcase. 
> 
> oh, and one more thing - mobile CPUs don't have IHS, so they don't have Tcase, 
> if sensors report a CPU Temp (not the coretemp ones) it's completely external 
> to the CPU

Thanks for the detailed explanation. However my initial concern
remains. Obviously you are very knowledgeable when it comes to CPU
internals, but average PC users may not be. I pretty much doubt that
they will think "CPU" when reading "Tcore". For the average user, it
seems better, albeit technically less accurate, to label the Tcase
temperature as "CPU Temp" and coretemp temperatures as "CPU Core 0
Temp", "CPU Core 1 Temp", etc.

> > > BTW, I couldn't use "compute" with "Core 0" and "Core 1" labels (I wanted
> > > to calibrate my core temperatures)
> > > line:
> > >
> > >  compute "Core 0" @ +3, @ -3
> > >
> > > was completely ignored...
> >
> > Compute statements take symbolic names, not labels, as their first
> > parameter. Try:
> >
> >   compute temp1 @ +3, @ -3
> 
> but there are no labels defined for coretemp to change temp1 to "Core 0", i'm 
> confused...

Ah, I get it now. The coretemp driver is one of the few drivers
implementing kernel-provided labels. libsensors reads these labels from
sysfs and processes them even in the absence of configuration file.
Thus you never get to see the symbolic name for these entries, not even
with "sensors -c /dev/null". You can just guess that a single
temperature input would be "temp1", and check in sysfs.

I admit this could be improved, I'll post a proposal to the list right
now.

-- 
Jean Delvare

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

Re: [lm-sensors] Specific configurations - Gigabyte mainboard

[Mark Nienberg]

Hubert,

If you two are done hashing this out, please post a revised copy of the 
configuration. I would be happy to get it into the wiki.

Thanks,

-- 
Mark Nienberg
Sent from an invalid address. Please reply to the group.


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

Re: [lm-sensors] Specific configurations - Gigabyte mainboard

[Hubert Kario]

On Wednesday 13 May 2009 18:54:48 Mark Nienberg wrote:
> Hubert,
>
> If you two are done hashing this out, please post a revised copy of the
> configuration. I would be happy to get it into the wiki.

I still don't know the exact ID under wich the sensor chip is visible. I had 
to RMA the board and now I'm wating for a replacement, should get it in friday 
or monday.

>
> Thanks,

-- 
Hubert Kario
QBS - Quality Business Software
ul. Ksawerów 30/85
02-656 Warszawa
POLAND
tel. +48 (22) 646-61-51, 646-74-24
fax +48 (22) 646-61-50


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