[lm-sensors] Why internal sensor on atom cpu isn't yet supported?

[Philip Pokorny]

The Intel EPSD systems with IPMI are now reporting 'margins' instead of 'temperatres' for many sensors.

A margin is measured in degrees and is a negative number.  As the CPU or other device gets hotter the value increases towards zero.  If it goes positive, then you have 'overheated' and exceeded the spec.

I would agree that you should expose thw value from the sensor but would suggest we label these as 'margins' and not 'temperatures'

Phil P.

-- 
Philip Pokorny, RHCE
Chief Hardware Architect
Penguin Computing  http://www.penguincomputing.com

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Maxim Levitsky [mailto:maximlevitsky at gmail.com]
Sent:	Tuesday, April 28, 2009 06:21 AM Pacific Standard Time
To:	Jean Delvare
Cc:	lm-sensors at lm-sensors.org
Subject:	Re: [lm-sensors] Why internal sensor on atom cpu isn't yet supported?

On Tue, 2009-04-28 at 15:13 +0200, Jean Delvare wrote:
> On Tue, 28 Apr 2009 12:39:32 +0200, Rudolf Marek wrote:
> > Maxim Levitsky wrote:
> > > I use an old patch, and it works fine, was it forgotten?
> > 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > Well I think there are more atoms with different TjMax and I became tired to ask 
> > Intel again and again.
> 
> What's the plan then, never ever support the Atom thermal sensors?
> Seems wrong, TjMax for Core/Core2 is not that clear either, but we
> still do support these.
> 

Lets just expose raw value, and let usespace (or user do the
calculation)

Just expose the  (30 degrees below maximum or so)

Best regards,
	Maxim Levitsky


_______________________________________________
lm-sensors mailing list
lm-sensors at lm-sensors.org
http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.lm-sensors.org/pipermail/lm-sensors/attachments/20090428/e1be9abb/attachment-0001.html