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

Philip Pokorny ppokorny at penguincomputing.com
Tue Apr 28 15:27:07 CEST 2009

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

Just expose the  (30 degrees below maximum or so)

Best regards,
	Maxim Levitsky

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

More information about the lm-sensors mailing list