linux-kernel - Re: [lm-sensors] [PATCH] hwmon: (coretemp) Fix TjMax for Atom N450/D410/D510 CPUs

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:	Sun, 17 Jan 2010 21:05:36 +0100
From:	Jean Delvare <khali@...ux-fr.org>
To:	Robert Hancock <hancockrwd@...il.com>
Cc:	Yuhong Bao <yuhongbao_386@...mail.com>,
	yong.y.wang@...ux.intel.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	huaxu.wan@...el.com, lm-sensors@...sensors.org
Subject: Re: [lm-sensors] [PATCH] hwmon: (coretemp) Fix TjMax for Atom    
 N450/D410/D510 CPUs

On Sun, 17 Jan 2010 13:29:06 -0600, Robert Hancock wrote:
> On 01/17/2010 09:15 AM, Jean Delvare wrote:
> > On Fri, 15 Jan 2010 18:02:27 -0800, Yuhong Bao wrote:
> >>
> >>> No matter what chipset or gfx you use with the new Atom chip, the
> >>> integrated memory controller (IMC) will always be used. This patch
> >>> checks the presence of that IMC. Hope this clarifies.
> >> To be more precise, Pine Trail Atoms integrate the entire northbridge, including the integrated graphics and the memory controller into the CPU, and there is a DMI connection to the southbridge, which is the Intel NM10, that is NOT integrated.
> >
> > What prevents another vendor from selling a compatible south bridge
> > then?
> 
> Nothing (other than licensing for the DMI bus, see NVIDIA and the 
> problems this creates for their ION chipset). I'm assuming this patch is 
> checking for the host bridge device though, that is integrated into the 
> CPU and would always be present.

That's where I am confused. The patch checks for the presence of the
Intel NM10, which, reading its description looks much like a south
bridge and not a memory controller (north bridge). So I think the patch
is wrong (or at least incomplete).

Anyway, how difficult would it be to set TjMax based on the CPUID? I
presume that the Intel Atom 400 and 500 series have their own CPUID
value, haven't they? This would seem even easier that checking for a
PCI device.

-- 
Jean Delvare
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/