On Sat, Dec 07, 2013 at 10:05:57AM -0800, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> Some Intel CPUs do not set the 'valid' bit in IA32_THERM_STATUS if the
> temperature is too low to be measured. This condition will not change until
> the CPU is hot enough for its temperature to be measured. Returning an error
> in such conditions is not very useful. Drop checking the valid bit and just
> return the reported temperature instead.
>
> Signed-off-by: Guenter Roeck <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> I don't think we ever closed on this. Giving it a shot.
>
No feedback. This will go into 3.14 unless there are objections.
Guenter
> drivers/hwmon/coretemp.c | 17 +++++++++--------
> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/hwmon/coretemp.c b/drivers/hwmon/coretemp.c
> index 310ce19..6e0579e 100644
> --- a/drivers/hwmon/coretemp.c
> +++ b/drivers/hwmon/coretemp.c
> @@ -177,18 +177,19 @@ static ssize_t show_temp(struct device *dev,
> /* Check whether the time interval has elapsed */
> if (!tdata->valid || time_after(jiffies, tdata->last_updated + HZ)) {
> rdmsr_on_cpu(tdata->cpu, tdata->status_reg, &eax, &edx);
> - tdata->valid = 0;
> - /* Check whether the data is valid */
> - if (eax & 0x80000000) {
> - tdata->temp = tdata->tjmax -
> - ((eax >> 16) & 0x7f) * 1000;
> - tdata->valid = 1;
> - }
> + /*
> + * Ignore the valid bit. In all observed cases the register
> + * value is either low or zero if the valid bit is 0.
> + * Return it instead of reporting an error which doesn't
> + * really help at all.
> + */
> + tdata->temp = tdata->tjmax - ((eax >> 16) & 0x7f) * 1000;
> + tdata->valid = 1;
> tdata->last_updated = jiffies;
> }
>
> mutex_unlock(&tdata->update_lock);
> - return tdata->valid ? sprintf(buf, "%d\n", tdata->temp) : -EAGAIN;
> + return sprintf(buf, "%d\n", tdata->temp);
> }
>
> struct tjmax_pci {
> --
> 1.7.9.7
>
>
_______________________________________________
lm-sensors mailing list
lm-sensors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors
