Hi Jean, Any luck on this front? thanks, -arun On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 10:51 PM, Arun Raghavan <arraghav@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Jean, >> >> On Sat, 13 Nov 2010 18:45:16 -0500, Arun Raghavan wrote: >>> I recompiled with HZ/10 and I still can't see any resolution when the >>> temperature begins to rise - here are two consecutive readings 100ms >>> apart: >>> >>> 0: +29.0°C 1: +24.0°C 2: +24.0°C 8: +27.0°C 9: +19.0°C 10: +26.0°C >>> <Begin execution> >>> 0: +35.0°C 1: +29.0°C 2: +27.0°C 8: +35.0°C 9: +30.0°C 10: +36.0°C >>> >>> Any further suggestions? >> >> You could try HZ/100, just for testing. What's your test protocol, BTW? >> I'll try doing my own tests. >> > HZ/100 didn't give me any differences either. I'm going to try reading > the MSR myself and see whether there's intermediate updates. > My test programs are from the cpuburn suite. I run 6 of them (one each > pinned to a thread). A script monitors the temperature continually (in > fixed intervals). Initially the CPUs are kept idle for 2 minutes, then > the 6 threads are kicked-off to run for 5 minutes and then the threads > are killed off with the temperature being monitored for a further 2 > minutes. > The fixed interval was 1s in the graph I sent you earlier and brought > down to 10ms and 1ms with HZ/10 and HZ/100 versions. > Please let me know what your testing protocol is too. > > thanks, > -arun > _______________________________________________ lm-sensors mailing list lm-sensors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors
