linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] AMD Thermal Interrupt Support

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]

Message-ID: <26145.1198895417@turing-police.cc.vt.edu>
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