Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2009 18:13:32 +1100 (EST) From: Ian Smith <smithi@nimnet.asn.au> To: Chris Whitehouse <cwhiteh@onetel.com> Cc: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org Subject: Re: acpi_tz0: _CRT value is absurd, ignored (256.0C) (was pr kern/105537) Message-ID: <20090330174824.L95588@sola.nimnet.asn.au> In-Reply-To: <49CFFBBE.30605@onetel.com> References: <49C80E65.9090500@onetel.com> <49C93309.6050708@iki.fi> <20090325140718.J95588@sola.nimnet.asn.au> <49C9EE50.6070507@onetel.com> <1237992462.1297.22.camel@RabbitsDen> <49CBF7D1.20102@onetel.com> <49CC147A.3030805@root.org> <1238118621.1365.35.camel@RabbitsDen> <49CCDCBA.3000406@onetel.com> <20090329223815.U95588@sola.nimnet.asn.au> <49CFFBBE.30605@onetel.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 29 Mar 2009, Chris Whitehouse wrote: > Ian Smith wrote: [..] > > Try adding it to loader.conf and rebooting. > > Nope still unknown oid. But in view of other progress I don't think that > matters, at least for me. Good to see you got there with the patched ASL; should help others too. > > I don't know where these various sensors live. Board? Package? Die? > > > > > hw.acpi.thermal.tz2.temperature: 43.0C > > > hw.acpi.thermal.tz2.active: -1 > > > hw.acpi.thermal.tz2.passive_cooling: 0 > > > hw.acpi.thermal.tz2.thermal_flags: 0 > > > hw.acpi.thermal.tz2._PSV: -1 > > > hw.acpi.thermal.tz2._HOT: -1 > > > hw.acpi.thermal.tz2._CRT: 105.0C > > > hw.acpi.thermal.tz2._ACx: -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 > > > hw.acpi.thermal.tz2._TC1: 1 > > > hw.acpi.thermal.tz2._TC2: 2 > > > hw.acpi.thermal.tz2._TSP: 300 > > > > CPU1. From the messages it appears that burnk7 ran on just CPU0 (tz1). > > For some of the time I was running one instance of burnK7, other times 2 > instances. I just tested and 2 instances does run on both cores. Right. I was well wrong about CPU1 being TZ2. Perhaps its the GPU? If still interested, something like glxgears would test the theory. The same _CRT and _TC1,TC2,TSP values did assist me into false assumption :) > > > The two cpu temps come from coretemp.ko module. > > > > These I don't get. They always track a few degrees above tz1 value, but > > rarely differ by more than 2C, while your burnk7 run showed CPU0 getting > > much hotter than CPU1, which only slowly rose during the run, indicating > > sympathetic package warming with an essentially idle CPU1, perhaps? > > Do you mean TZ1 gets much hotter than TZ2? When I ran 2 instances of burnk7 > one ran on each cpu (viewed in top). When I ran a single instance the on-die > temps in the first two columns still tracked each other. Also this machine is > running KDE which is always doing something which blurs the figures a bit. > > I put messages2 next the previous one, I think it shows that tz2 is not cpu1 > even if tz1 is measuring cpu temp somehow. dev.cpu.n.temperature columns are > the on-die temps. Those oids are only visible when coretemp is loaded, I > don't know if the ASL is using those temperature probes. http://www.fishercroft.plus.com/messages2.gz indeed does show that. Making sense now; there's no reason two sensors on one die should vary much, so there's no need for a separate TZ for the second core. Sorry if my further education was at the expense of your problem .. cheers, Ian
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20090330174824.L95588>