On Sat, 10 Apr 2010 10:07:30 +0200, Jean Delvare <khali@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
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@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors
