linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] hwmon: k10temp driver improvements

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: <CANVEwpa2YmfdJ8eAK9-Kx8z+m2uiexCjXF_rV8UpQaampxqO4A@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Sun, 19 Jan 2020 01:08:38 +0000
From:   Ken Moffat <zarniwhoop73@...glemail.com>
To:     Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
Cc:     linux-hwmon@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Clemens Ladisch <clemens@...isch.de>,
        Jean Delvare <jdelvare@...e.com>,
        Darren Salt <devspam@...eofthesa.me.uk>,
        Bernhard Gebetsberger <bernhard.gebetsberger@....at>,
        Ondrej Čerman <ocerman@...1.eu>,
        Holger Kiehl <Holger.Kiehl@....de>,
        Sebastian Reichel <sebastian.reichel@...labora.com>,
        Brad Campbell <lists2009@...rfbargle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] hwmon: k10temp driver improvements

On Sun, 19 Jan 2020 at 00:49, Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net> wrote:
>
> On 1/18/20 4:33 PM, Ken Moffat wrote:
> > On Sat, 18 Jan 2020 at 17:26, Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net> wrote:
> >>
> >> This patch series implements various improvements for the k10temp driver.
> >>
> >> Patch 1/5 introduces the use of bit operations.
> >>
> >> Patch 2/5 converts the driver to use the devm_hwmon_device_register_with_info
> >> API. This not only simplifies the code and reduces its size, it also
> >> makes the code easier to maintain and enhance.
> >>
> >> Patch 3/5 adds support for reporting Core Complex Die (CCD) temperatures
> >> on Ryzen 3 (Zen2) CPUs.
> >>
> >> Patch 4/5 adds support for reporting core and SoC current and voltage
> >> information on Ryzen CPUs.
> >>
> >> Patch 5/5 removes the maximum temperature from Tdie for Ryzen CPUs.
> >> It is inaccurate, misleading, and it just doesn't make sense to report
> >> wrong information.
> >>
> >> With all patches in place, output on Ryzen 3900X CPUs looks as follows
> >> (with the system under load).
> >>
> >> k10temp-pci-00c3
> >> Adapter: PCI adapter
> >> Vcore:        +1.36 V
> >> Vsoc:         +1.18 V
> >> Tdie:         +86.8°C
> >> Tctl:         +86.8°C
> >> Tccd1:        +80.0°C
> >> Tccd2:        +81.8°C
> >> Icore:       +44.14 A
> >> Isoc:        +13.83 A
> >>
> >> The voltage and current information is limited to Ryzen CPUs. Voltage
> >> and current reporting on Threadripper and EPYC CPUs is different, and the
> >> reported information is either incomplete or wrong. Exclude it for the time
> >> being; it can always be added if/when more information becomes available.
> >>
> >> Tested with the following Ryzen CPUs:
> >>      1300X A user with this CPU in the system reported somewhat unexpected
> >>            values for Vcore; it isn't entirely if at all clear why that is
> >>            the case. Overall this does not warrant holding up the series.
> >
> > As the owner of that machine, very much agreed.
> >  >>      1600
> >>      1800X
> >>      2200G
> >>      2400G
> >>      3800X
> >>      3900X
> >>      3950X
> >>
> >
> > I also had sensible results for v1 on 2500U and 3400G
> >
> Sorry, I somehow missed that.
>
> >> v2: Added tested-by: tags as received.
> >>      Don't display voltage and current information for Threadripper and EPYC.
> >>      Stop displaying the fixed (and wrong) maximum temperature of 70 degrees C
> >>      for Tdie on model 17h/18h CPUs.
> >
> > For v2 on my 2500U, system idle and then under load -
> >
> > --- k10temp-idle 2020-01-19 00:16:18.812002121 +0000
> > +++ k10temp-load 2020-01-19 00:22:05.595470877 +0000
> > @@ -1,15 +1,15 @@
> >   k10temp-pci-00c3
> >   Adapter: PCI adapter
> > -Vcore:        +0.98 V
> > +Vcore:        +1.15 V
> >   Vsoc:         +0.93 V
> > -Tdie:         +38.2°C
> > -Tctl:         +38.2°C
> > -Icore:       +10.39 A
> > -Isoc:         +6.49 A
> > +Tdie:         +76.2°C
> > +Tctl:         +76.2°C
> > +Icore:       +51.96 A
> > +Isoc:         +7.58 A
> >
> >   amdgpu-pci-0300
> >   Adapter: PCI adapter
> >   vddgfx:           N/A
> >   vddnb:            N/A
> > -edge:         +38.0°C  (crit = +80.0°C, hyst =  +0.0°C)
> > +edge:         +76.0°C  (crit = +80.0°C, hyst =  +0.0°C)
> >
> > I'll ony test v2 on the 3400G if you think the results would add something.
> >
>
> Thanks a lot for the additional testing! I don't think we need another
> test on 3400G; after all, the actual measurement code didn't change.
>
> Everyone: I'll be happy to add Tested-by: tags with your name and e-mail
> address to the series, but you'll have to send it to me. I appreciate
> all your testing and would like to acknowledge it, but I can not add
> Tested-by: tags (or any other tags, for that matter) on my own.
>
> Thanks,
> Guenter

For the little it is worth:
Tested-by Ken Moffat <zarniwhoop73@...glemail.com>