The Intel EPSD systems with IPMI are now reporting 'margins' instead of 'temperatres' for many sensors. A margin is measured in degrees and is a negative number. As the CPU or other device gets hotter the value increases towards zero. If it goes positive, then you have 'overheated' and exceeded the spec. I would agree that you should expose thw value from the sensor but would suggest we label these as 'margins' and not 'temperatures' Phil P. -- Philip Pokorny, RHCE Chief Hardware Architect Penguin Computing http://www.penguincomputing.com -----Original Message----- From: Maxim Levitsky [mailto:maximlevitsky at gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 28, 2009 06:21 AM Pacific Standard Time To: Jean Delvare Cc: lm-sensors at lm-sensors.org Subject: Re: Why internal sensor on atom cpu isn't yet supported? On Tue, 2009-04-28 at 15:13 +0200, Jean Delvare wrote: > On Tue, 28 Apr 2009 12:39:32 +0200, Rudolf Marek wrote: > > Maxim Levitsky wrote: > > > I use an old patch, and it works fine, was it forgotten? > > > > Hi, > > > > Well I think there are more atoms with different TjMax and I became tired to ask > > Intel again and again. > > What's the plan then, never ever support the Atom thermal sensors? > Seems wrong, TjMax for Core/Core2 is not that clear either, but we > still do support these. > Lets just expose raw value, and let usespace (or user do the calculation) Just expose the (30 degrees below maximum or so) Best regards, Maxim Levitsky _______________________________________________ lm-sensors mailing list lm-sensors at lm-sensors.org http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.lm-sensors.org/pipermail/lm-sensors/attachments/20090428/e1be9abb/attachment-0001.html
