From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: dienet Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2010 17:22:22 +0000 Subject: Re: [lm-sensors] Coretemp goes up since 2.6.31.4 Message-Id: List-Id: References: <20100409111733.7bb2b5fa@hyperion.delvare> In-Reply-To: <20100409111733.7bb2b5fa@hyperion.delvare> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: lm-sensors@vger.kernel.org On Sat, 10 Apr 2010 10:07:30 +0200, Jean Delvare wrote: > I assume these results are using the original coretemp driver of each > kernel. So, you are in one of these cases where the heuristic changes > in 2.6. I can't say whether this is correct in your case or not, this > heuristic is a horrible mess. But the relevant thing here is that your > CPU is actually running _cooler_ in 2.6.33 than in 2.6.31: 71 degrees > below the critical limit, instead of 67 degrees below the limit > previously. In both cases, you have a huge thermal margin, so it's > alright. I'm just saying what I see. And I see that sensors show higher temp. on 2.6.33 then on 2.6.31 - that's all I can say. Now I'm on 2.6.33.2 and I never see 30 deg. or below. On 2.6.31 30 deg. or below was quite normal (but I don't know if that was the *real* temp). > The fact that the high limit has the same value as the critical limit > is certainly a bug, as it doesn't make any sense physically. Any way to fix it? I can say that this bug is quite old or my system isn't configured for a long time. > So 2.6.33 is indeed better, which is good news. I'll say that after longger work. 1h is nothing, and there is a big margin of error. -- pozdr0 dienet "Old C programmers never die. They're just cast into void." _______________________________________________ lm-sensors mailing list lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors