linux-kernel - Re: Linux 2.6.25 (coretemp reads high temperatures)

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:	Mon, 21 Apr 2008 18:28:58 +0200
From:	Matthew <jackdachef@...il.com>
To:	"Thomas Bächler" <thomas@...hlinux.org>
Cc:	"Bart Van Assche" <bart.vanassche@...il.com>,
	torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
	"Linux Kernel Mailing List" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Rudolf Marek" <r.marek@...embler.cz>,
	"Gene Heskett" <gene.heskett@...il.com>,
	"Len Brown" <lenb@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: Linux 2.6.25 (coretemp reads high temperatures)

On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 6:10 PM, Thomas Bächler <thomas@...hlinux.org> wrote:
> Len Brown schrieb:
>
>
> > Hello Mat,
> > I'm not familiar with "coretemp", can you point me to the exact version
> > of the application you are running so I can see how it is getting at
> > the underlying information?
> >
>
>  I think there is some confusion here: "coretemp" is a kernel module, and
> all applications reading it will probably use the lm_sensors libraries. (I
> don't think the hwmon module are related to ACPI)
>
>  $ modinfo coretemp
>  filename:       /lib/modules/2.6.25-ARCH/kernel/drivers/hwmon/coretemp.ko
>  license:        GPL
>  description:    Intel Core temperature monitor
>  author:         Rudolf Marek <r.marek@...embler.cz>
>  depends:
>  vermagic:       2.6.25-ARCH SMP preempt mod_unload
>
>  That said, I have two Core 2 CPUs (one mobile, one desktop) and the values
> coretemp reports have not changed compared to earlier kernel versions
> (around 60°C when idle on the mobile, much less on the desktop).
>
>
>  > Also, do you see any change with and without kernel built with
> CONFIG_THERMAL=y?
>
>  The values I see from ACPI thermal are also the same as before (this is
> funny: they are always about 15°C cooler than the coretemp values).
>
>  So I don't see a regression here, maybe the reporter should try a vanilla
> kernel.
>
>

thermal isn't working on this board (if you mean /proc/acpi/thermal_zone ...)

I also tried a vanilla kernel & it showed the same higher temperature ;(

here the last mail (on lkml it was corrupted) - I don't know if you
were able to read it

>  sure, I'll test-drive the vanilla-kernel, too
>
>  thanks

ok, tested the vanilla-kernel this morning and it shows the exact high
temperatures (with CONFIG_THERMAL=y)

I've got a question:

when trying to disable thermal it just sits there & won't change:
<*> Hardware Monitoring support  --->
 -*- Generic Thermal sysfs driver  --->

it seemingly depends on other things:
Selected by: ACPI_THERMAL && !X86_VOYAGER && ACPI && ACPI_PROCESSOR

is it safe to disable acpi_processor and acpi or CONFIG_THERMAL in
general ? or will it burn down my box ? ;)

I'm asking this because it says/writes:
CONFIG_ACPI_THERMAL:                                                    │
 │                                                                         │
 │ This driver adds support for ACPI thermal zones.  Most mobile and       │
 │ some desktop systems support ACPI thermal zones.  It is HIGHLY          │
 │ recommended that this option be enabled, as your processor(s)           │
 │ may be damaged without it.


thanks

Mat