On Mon, 9 May 2011 22:07:10 +0200 Jean Delvare wrote:
> On Mon, 09 May 2011 13:50:41 -0600, Harry G McGavran Jr wrote:
> > On Mon, 9 May 2011 21:42:31 +0200 Jean Delvare wrote:
> > > This is a valuable observation. I presume that these CPUs are too old
> > > to be multicore, best they could have it hyperthreading. Harry, can you
> > > please share the contents of /proc/cpuinfo?
> >
> > Attached below ...
>
.
.
.
>
> Interesting... Your CPU is slightly more recent than Jeff's (stepping
> 10 instead of 1), both advertise HT but yours has it disabled. Maybe
> there's an option in the BIOS to enable or disable HT? Or maybe Linux
> didn't like HT for some reason (in which case it should say so in the
> boot messages.)
I don't see anything about HT in the boot messages.
I didn't change anything in the BIOS regarding the CPU from
whatever the defaults are. I don't remember seeing any
options for HT (or CPUfreq) in the BIOS and I haven't
changed anything in Linux from the Ubuntu Lucid default distro
regarding either HT or CPUfreq...
>
> It also seems like Jeff has CPUfreq enabled on his system and you do
> not. It's unrelated to hardware monitoring, but for the sake of power
> savings, it might be worth investigating.
If I run cpufreq-selector as root, I get:
No cpufreq support
Harry
>
> --
> Jean Delvare
--
Harry G. McGavran, Jr.
E-mail: w5pny@xxxxxxxxx
_______________________________________________
lm-sensors mailing list
lm-sensors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors
