Hi Guenter, Fenghua,
On Wed, 1 Jun 2011 11:08:43 -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> Further relax temperature range checks after reading the IA32_TEMPERATURE_TARGET
> register. If the register returns a value other than 0 in bits 16..32, assume
> that the returned value is correct.
>
> This change applies to both packet and core temperature limits.
Sorry for the later reply. Looks good to me, tested OK on my 3 systems.
See comment below though.
> Cc: Carsten Emde <C.Emde@xxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@xxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Jean Delvare <khali@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Guenter Roeck <guenter.roeck@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/hwmon/coretemp.c | 4 ++--
> 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/hwmon/coretemp.c b/drivers/hwmon/coretemp.c
> index 1680977..85e9379 100644
> --- a/drivers/hwmon/coretemp.c
> +++ b/drivers/hwmon/coretemp.c
> @@ -296,7 +296,7 @@ static int get_tjmax(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c, u32 id, struct device *dev)
> * If the TjMax is not plausible, an assumption
> * will be used
> */
> - if (val >= 70 && val <= 125) {
> + if (val) {
> dev_info(dev, "TjMax is %d C.\n", val);
> return val * 1000;
> }
> @@ -326,7 +326,7 @@ static int get_pkg_tjmax(unsigned int cpu, struct device *dev)
> err = rdmsr_safe_on_cpu(cpu, MSR_IA32_TEMPERATURE_TARGET, &eax, &edx);
> if (!err) {
> val = (eax >> 16) & 0xff;
> - if (val > 80 && val < 120)
> + if (val)
> return val * 1000;
> }
> dev_warn(dev, "Unable to read Pkg-TjMax from CPU:%u\n", cpu);
While we're here, I don't quite get the rationale for having separate
functions get_tjmax() and get_pkg_tjmax(). They do pretty much the
same, don't they? Except that get_pkg_tjmax defaults to 100°C when
get_tjmax calls adjust_tjmax(). This seems wrong, even though I guess
it makes no difference in practice as adjust_tjmax() should only be
needed for older CPU models without the package temperature sensor.
Going one step further, if MSR_IA32_TEMPERATURE_TARGET is the right MSR
for the package TjMax, then this pretty much means that this MSR (or at
least bits 23:16 in it) is not per-core but per-package (it will return
the same value on every core.) Then why are we calling get_tjmax (and
then adjust_tjmax) on every core if the result will always be the same?
This seems conceptually wrong and expensive.
So I would suggest that we move tjmax to struct pdev_entry, and only
fetch it once from MSR_IA32_TEMPERATURE_TARGET. This would also solve a
minor annoyance I'm seeing in my kernel logs with the latest version of
the driver:
coretemp coretemp.0: TjMax is 97 C.
coretemp coretemp.0: TjMax is 97 C.
coretemp coretemp.0: TjMax is 97 C.
coretemp coretemp.0: TjMax is 97 C.
Imagine the result on a system with more CPUs and more core per CPUs...
Not sure if the message itself is very valuable anyway, as tjmax will
be visible in the output of "sensors" or any other monitoring
application, but if we keep it, it should only be displayed once per
physical CPU.
--
Jean Delvare
_______________________________________________
lm-sensors mailing list
lm-sensors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors
