On Mon, May 09, 2011 at 04:07:10PM -0400, 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 ... > > processor : 0 > vendor_id : GenuineIntel > cpu family : 15 > model : 4 > model name : Intel(R) Xeon(TM) CPU 3.00GHz > stepping : 10 > cpu MHz : 2992.603 > cache size : 2048 KB > physical id : 0 > siblings : 1 > core id : 0 > cpu cores : 1 > apicid : 0 > initial apicid : 0 > fpu : yes > fpu_exception : yes > cpuid level : 5 > wp : yes > flags : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 clflush dts acpi mmx fxsr sse sse2 ss ht tm pbe syscall nx lm constant_tsc up pebs bts pni dtes64 monitor ds_cpl cid cx16 xtpr lahf_lm > bogomips : 5985.20 > clflush size : 64 > cache_alignment : 128 > address sizes : 36 bits physical, 48 bits virtual > power management: > > 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.) > More likely the BIOS. I have several Dell systems with HT CPU, and the BIOS always offers the option to disable it. Guenter _______________________________________________ lm-sensors mailing list lm-sensors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors
