From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG  Mon Aug 22 22:46:42 2011
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::28])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D7811106566C;
	Mon, 22 Aug 2011 22:46:41 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from jkim@FreeBSD.org)
From: Jung-uk Kim <jkim@FreeBSD.org>
To: Andriy Gapon <avg@freebsd.org>
Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2011 18:45:56 -0400
User-Agent: KMail/1.6.2
References: <201107312128.29322.lobo@bsd.com.br>
	<201108011706.14163.jkim@FreeBSD.org>
	<4E50DA45.3010809@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <4E50DA45.3010809@FreeBSD.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <201108221846.05841.jkim@FreeBSD.org>
Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Phenom II 975 BE shows 0 celsius
X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD
	<freebsd-hackers.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hackers>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>,
	<mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2011 22:46:42 -0000

On Sunday 21 August 2011 06:13 am, Andriy Gapon wrote:
> on 02/08/2011 00:06 Jung-uk Kim said the following:
> > On Monday 01 August 2011 04:10 pm, Andriy Gapon wrote:
> >> on 01/08/2011 22:48 Jung-uk Kim said the following:
> >>> I have mixed feeling about this because I own a system with
> >>> such CPU/motherboard combo, too.  I also believe it works well
> >>> but errata is errata.  If vendor says we shouldn't use it, then
> >>> we shouldn't. In fact, I am just following Linux as an example
> >>> here but I have no problem with turning this into a warning
> >>> message, either.
> >>
> >> Let's cut a deal :-)
> >> If we start using amdtemp for fan control, emergency system
> >> shutdown or similar, then we follow the strict path.  Until
> >> then, while we use amdtemp to amuse users with numbers, let's
> >> just print a warning :-)
> >
> > Okay, here is the new patch (not tested on the affected system
> > yet):
> >
> > http://people.freebsd.org/~jkim/amdtemp2.diff
>
> Tested the patch - looks good!
> One comment though: it seems that sensor_offset defaults to zero
> now. Would it be a good idea to default it to what it previously
> used to be? On my system the hardware reports the offset correctly
> (as verified by using independent hardware monitoring logic in
> Super I/O), so defaulting it to zero is kind of a regression.

If we want to preserve the previous default, we have to reintroduce 
DiodeOffset or to define more quirks. :-/

Jung-uk Kim