lists.openwall.net   lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  linux-cve-announce  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Fri, 28 Dec 2007 21:30:17 -0500
From:	Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu
To:	Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>
Cc:	Russell Leidich <rml@...gle.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] AMD Thermal Interrupt Support

On Sat, 29 Dec 2007 03:11:51 +0100, Andi Kleen said:
> On Friday 28 December 2007 21:40:28 Russell Leidich wrote:

> +		printk(KERN_CRIT "CPU 0x%x: Thermal monitoring not "
> +			"functional.\n", cpu);
> 
> Why is that KERN_CRIT? Does not seem that critical to me.

If you think you're running on a chipset that *should* support thermal
monitoring, and it isn't there in a usable state, that seems pretty critical
to me.  If that didn't work, you probably can't trust the "oh, the chip will
thermal-limit itself if it gets to 100C or whatever" either.

Of course, I'm just speaking as somebody who quite recently had a system do a
thermal throttle when it hit 85C due to a cooling system failure.  I'm pretty
sure that if thermal monitoring wasn't functional, it wouldn't have throttled
either (after all, how can you throttle when you hit a given temp when you
don't have a working way to tell what the temp even is?), and I'd be looking at
extensive hardware damage...


Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ