http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10658
--- Comment #84 from Martin Ling martin-kernel-bugzi...@earth.li 2009-05-08
14:29:48 ---
I'm now running 2.6.30-rc4, with 95000 written to the thermal zone passive
setting. This works fine, as per previous patches.
Now that the question of
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10658
Len Brown len.br...@intel.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|CLOSED
--- Comment #83
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10658
Zhang Rui rui.zh...@intel.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10658
--- Comment #81 from Martin Ling martin-kernel-bugzi...@earth.li 2009-04-02
22:32:55 ---
I have just had another look at this under Windows, again using the I8KFanGUI
tool. The temperatures reported are the same as under Linux. It seems there
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10658
Len Brown len.br...@intel.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10658
Len Brown len.br...@intel.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|ASSIGNED
--
Configure
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10658
Len Brown len.br...@intel.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
--
Configure
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10658
--- Comment #80 from len.br...@intel.com 2009-03-15 12:22 ---
Thanks for the log in comment #75
16:07:04 - 92C
16:07:28 - 97C
Running at 2GHz, the temperature on this box rose 5C in only 14 seconds?!
I don't know how the
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10658
--- Comment #75 from martin-kernel-bugzi...@earth.li 2009-02-27 08:14
---
Created an attachment (id=20380)
-- (http://bugzilla.kernel.org/attachment.cgi?id=20380action=view)
Log of DSDT debug messages, annotated with temperature and
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10658
--- Comment #76 from mjg59-ker...@srcf.ucam.org 2009-02-27 08:24 ---
Interesting. We do indeed get thermal notifications as we head towards the trip
point, and as we get even closer it fires the CPU notifications. So in this
case it
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10658
--- Comment #77 from martin-kernel-bugzi...@earth.li 2009-02-27 08:54
---
It would seem that if the BIOS is starting to cut off P-states, we're in a
passive cooling situation and should probably start treating it as such even if
there
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10658
--- Comment #78 from mjg59-ker...@srcf.ucam.org 2009-02-27 08:58 ---
Right, your thermal zone isn't tied to the CPU, so we can't work back from
there. I suspect that getting a thermal notification and realising that we're
within 5
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10658
--- Comment #79 from martin-kernel-bugzi...@earth.li 2009-02-27 09:57
---
I wonder if it would make sense to split up the functionality in Matthew's
patch into two parts. Rather than a single sysfs entry at
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10658
--- Comment #73 from tr...@suse.de 2009-02-26 01:06 ---
Some Acer also seem to need thermal polling:
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=404245
I can make the guy try these and look deeper whether it could help as soon as
the
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10658
--- Comment #74 from tr...@suse.de 2009-02-26 03:00 ---
Hmm, there is the corner case with machines which do have an active and a
passive thermal trip point, but do not throw thermal events and need thermal
polling. But maybe we come
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10658
--- Comment #69 from len.br...@intel.com 2009-02-25 14:46 ---
Martin, Matthew, Thomas,
Thank you for your tenacity.
I do now agree that it is worth the risk to try to deploy
this w/o DMI, for there will be other boxes like this one.
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10658
--- Comment #70 from martin-kernel-bugzi...@earth.li 2009-02-25 15:35
---
Len,
Thanks for getting this patch accepted. It sounds like it provides a useful
catch for similar problems with other machines, even if we can ultimately
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10658
--- Comment #71 from mjg59-ker...@srcf.ucam.org 2009-02-25 15:48 ---
The CP notifications are indicating that the _PPC contents have been updated -
this effectively gives the OS the set of available frequencies. The first is
presumably
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10658
--- Comment #72 from mjg59-ker...@srcf.ucam.org 2009-02-25 16:00 ---
Looking at the ACPI dump, GPE 1d seems to be a simple SMI event trigger to
let the OS know that the low-level firmware has noticed something happening. If
you want to
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10658
rui.zh...@intel.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10658
rui.zh...@intel.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||len.br...@intel.com
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10658
--- Comment #66 from [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-09 04:46 ---
The dcdbas driver isn't present, I've never built it.
I'll have a look at patching the DSDT.
--
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10658
--- Comment #64 from [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-07 03:36 ---
(in reply to comment #61)
Another idea specific to this ASL implementation:
There is exactly one way how BIOS can tell the OS to check for the temperature
asynchronoulsy
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10658
--- Comment #65 from [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-07 18:52 ---
Do you know how to read and override DSDT?
Here is a description
http://www.lesswatts.org/projects/acpi/faq.php
You should cluster above mentioned functions with lines like:
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10658
--- Comment #63 from [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-04 23:15 ---
(In reply to comment #61)
I currently rewrite this to get something accepted.
First step is moving the polling to drivers/thermal/ and also the
polling_frequency option
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10658
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED],
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10658
--- Comment #62 from [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-04 06:08 ---
One workaround that probably works for a lot machines could be to take _TSP
value as general thermal polling value if no _TZP value is provided.
This does not work here of
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10658
--- Comment #60 from [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-06-25 06:58 ---
how is the machine violating the specs?
The thermal zone must provide a sane _TZP Thermal Zone Polling and a passive
cooling trip point to provide a proper thermal
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10658
--- Comment #58 from [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-06-24 04:50 ---
Comment #57 is the prove that Windows is:
a) Polling the temperature even the BIOS does not tell the OS to dos so
(at least not in ACPI specified way)
b) Windows
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10658
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEEDINFO|NEW
--- Comment #59 from
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10658
--- Comment #55 from [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-06-12 13:14 ---
I've just tested the patch in comment #54 on 2.6.26-rc5. I had to add an
#include linux/workqueue.h to the patched thermal_sys.c to build it. It works
just the same as the
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10658
--- Comment #56 from [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-06-12 13:16 ---
I will be on vacation from 05/30 until 06/22 and will be back on 06/23. Please
contact Suresh B Siddha / Len Brown / Arjan van de Ven for any urgent issues.
Thanks, Venki
--
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10658
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|
|m
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10658
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #16166|0 |1
is obsolete|
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10658
--- Comment #47 from [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-06-03 10:55 ---
Len,
if there were any significant body of hardware where infrequently reading the
temperature caused problems, I suspect we'd have heard about it. However, this
is a
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10658
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |NEEDINFO
--- Comment #46 from
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10658
--- Comment #48 from [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-06-03 11:40 ---
Phantom ACPI _PSV trip points are not how datacenter
thermal constraints will be managed. In datacenters,
Node Manager informs the OS to stay within a maximum
P-state, and if
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10658
--- Comment #49 from [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-06-03 12:00 ---
Your description of node manager is effectively identical to using a fake _PSV
- it's just got a wider range of temperature information available to it. In
either case you're
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10658
--- Comment #50 from [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-06-03 12:12 ---
Created an attachment (id=16383)
-- (http://bugzilla.kernel.org/attachment.cgi?id=16383action=view)
grep . /sys/firmware/acpi/interrupts/* output when system hot.
--
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10658
--- Comment #51 from [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-06-03 12:12 ---
Created an attachment (id=16384)
-- (http://bugzilla.kernel.org/attachment.cgi?id=16384action=view)
dmidecode output
--
Configure bugmail:
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10658
--- Comment #53 from [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-06-03 18:09 ---
(In reply to comment #49)
the current implemetation of the generic thermal
class even disables in-kernel handling of critical shutdown temperatures!
Hah, after talk with
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10658
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10658
--- Comment #43 from [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-21 01:47 ---
Alexey,Jean: Matthew wants to enable temperature polling every 10 seconds if a
thermal zone does not export a polling variable. He also wants to introduce a
passive trip
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10658
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #16134|0 |1
is obsolete|
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10658
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED],
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10658
--- Comment #42 from [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-20 02:04 ---
How much effort it is to access the temperature registers, depend on the type
of sensor device. LPC access is very fast, while SMBus access is slower.
However, reading a
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10658
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|CLOSED |REOPENED
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10658
--- Comment #37 from [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-19 08:24 ---
I agree with Len and would also not activate thermal polling by default. This
often is very slow and might cause problems on other machines where the BIOS
vendor intended to
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10658
--- Comment #38 from [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-19 08:34 ---
Because there's no reason to believe that it's something that can be well
determined at the per-model level. I can't see any situation in which polling
could trigger bugs,
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10658
--- Comment #39 from [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-19 14:34 ---
Unless I'm missing something we're talking about polling every 10 seconds until
we hit the passive limit, and then every second. It surprises me that this is a
performance
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10658
--- Comment #40 from [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-19 14:39 ---
It used to be the case that reading some hardware attached to embedded
controllers would block the kernel for a significant period of time while it
polled for completion, but
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10658
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #16133|0 |1
is obsolete|
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10658
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #16135|0 |1
is obsolete|
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10658
--- Comment #30 from [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-15 04:36 ---
I have now tested the patches from comments #25-27 on 2.6.25.2, and they work
perfectly. Passive cooling kicks in above 96C and uses all the available
frequencies. I can
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10658
--- Comment #31 from [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-15 04:48 ---
My proposal would be to only enable polling if there's no existing passive trip
point. THat would avoid breaking the system in #8842.
--
Configure bugmail:
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10658
--- Comment #32 from [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-15 04:50 ---
Note that there is an error in the comment #26 patch, the
EXPORT_SYMBOL(processor_list) line should read
EXPORT_SYMBOL(acpi_processor_list).
--
Configure bugmail:
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10658
--- Comment #33 from [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-15 10:42 ---
I agree with Len that:
Enable polling when no _TZP method in thermal zone
in general is not a good idea.
tzp was a module parameter for thermal, does this not work anymore for
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10658
--- Comment #34 from [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-15 11:35 ---
BTW: Has someone an idea why these are overheating now?
Did you make sure the fan slots are clean (I fixed up a bug like that
recently).
The fan and heatsink are clean, as
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10658
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REJECTED|CLOSED
--- Comment #28 from
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10658
--- Comment #29 from [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-14 04:40 ---
After you verify that you're running the latest BIOS
and that it provides no BIOS SETUP knobs related to cooling
I can confirm that the BIOS is the latest version, A06.
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10658
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||acpi-
|
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10658
--- Comment #24 from [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-13 17:47 ---
Len,
I disagree. Here's a patch-set I've been working on that provides what should
be a decent workaround for this issue, without having any negative impact on
functional
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10658
--- Comment #25 from [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-13 17:49 ---
Created an attachment (id=16133)
-- (http://bugzilla.kernel.org/attachment.cgi?id=16133action=view)
Enable polling when no _TZP method in thermal zone
Fix Linux to conform
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10658
--- Comment #26 from [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-13 17:50 ---
Created an attachment (id=16134)
-- (http://bugzilla.kernel.org/attachment.cgi?id=16134action=view)
Export the list of processor handles from the ACPI core to drivers
Add a
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10658
--- Comment #27 from [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-13 17:53 ---
Created an attachment (id=16135)
-- (http://bugzilla.kernel.org/attachment.cgi?id=16135action=view)
Add a passive cooling limit to zones which don't have one
If a thermal
65 matches
Mail list logo
