From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754058Ab1IPQWJ (ORCPT ); Fri, 16 Sep 2011 12:22:09 -0400 Received: from zone0.gcu-squad.org ([212.85.147.21]:38059 "EHLO services.gcu-squad.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751332Ab1IPQWH (ORCPT ); Fri, 16 Sep 2011 12:22:07 -0400 Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2011 18:21:51 +0200 From: Jean Delvare To: Alexander Stein Cc: guenter.roeck@ericsson.com, "R, Durgadoss" , "Yu, Fenghua" , lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [lm-sensors] coretemp: Support for Intel Atom E6XX CPU (TunnelCreek)? Message-ID: <20110916182151.463d6003@endymion.delvare> In-Reply-To: <201108031640.31196.alexander.stein@systec-electronic.com> References: <201106271220.51953.alexander.stein@systec-electronic.com> <201108031458.01805.alexander.stein@systec-electronic.com> <201108031640.31196.alexander.stein@systec-electronic.com> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.5 (GTK+ 2.20.1; x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Alexander, On Wed, 3 Aug 2011 16:40:30 +0200, Alexander Stein wrote: > On Wednesday 03 August 2011 15:26:53 R, Durgadoss wrote: > > Yes I checked with some Atom Guys here. > > Apparently there is no way to know it from the OS Level. > > > > > On Monday 27 June 2011 18:54:44 R, Durgadoss wrote: > > > > > Unfortunately, looking at Alexander's /proc/cpuinfo output, it looks > > > > > like the E6xx chips have no mention of E6xx in the CPU ID string, > > > > > which unfortunately kills the idea. > > > > > > > > > > Do you know if there is _any_ means to distinguish E6xx from E6xxT ? > > > > > > > > Sorry I do not know. But I can ask some folks here and get back > > > > to you guys. Should not take more time, once I identify the right > > > > person to ask :-) > > So, is there a possibility to add a module parameter to force a either > specific tjmax or the T model for E6xx? A parameter to force the T model for E6xx would be very very specific, while the problem at hand is much broader: the heuristics in adjust_tjmax() are best effort but largely insufficient in many (most?) cases. So, as we have been enable to provide a relative temperature scale interface in the past 2 years, a module parameter letting the user set TjMax as needed seems the best approach to me. I'll submit a patch doing this in a moment. -- Jean Delvare