From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D545DC33CB1 for ; Sun, 19 Jan 2020 15:46:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A430120882 for ; Sun, 19 Jan 2020 15:46:16 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="M/IQWl2W" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726956AbgASPqQ (ORCPT ); Sun, 19 Jan 2020 10:46:16 -0500 Received: from mail-yb1-f193.google.com ([209.85.219.193]:44829 "EHLO mail-yb1-f193.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726860AbgASPqQ (ORCPT ); Sun, 19 Jan 2020 10:46:16 -0500 Received: by mail-yb1-f193.google.com with SMTP id f136so8556200ybg.11; Sun, 19 Jan 2020 07:46:15 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=sender:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=qZjhidcUrCzkr/hOAkl6ASo84yToDWDqBzrR+InXMlE=; b=M/IQWl2We+98aLc7kR+F/xXWsfCnuBD4EaKQk4j9zV7dYXMsfk2+T7TRCjnt8jsx05 IlujGG/tGclM3mrdDpoDt5uhFeMSecO/Kbh4yjEOBHqp5N6Z70B2xr4bglsJ3pW/aMjS x1VL5LElrqw2MKmYuBC1YZbq4sOWr0cGb1GeDLk2EBdFWa6hnon9pNxpEZN7PJEdYjt1 5eSBypyfhUMnWby2PzRlBBjCme6ITVNoExO7m9Byrde+1yk7+bsELKwBaRpDv7srGJc6 PiSaCmJNNzhVTRuuRBrxZwLIB/KKVfDwLMcqKL3vVJtB0lp2VQ1FRDFoTn3GpfdQHlTU LDRw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id :date:user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=qZjhidcUrCzkr/hOAkl6ASo84yToDWDqBzrR+InXMlE=; b=fttNSKJqb4N4giBP1m2q16QXwlNSMO6uiE3VRuYP/W+M9mWimJRYTs5rqXMim7wkX+ RIq1B2bf44snHenAnDbdgU+87nVztkiO5V2Tf5/9J++kAZ62azDAbRBPomilBKNkhV32 jb2rC2Nyqzl95fgK/C3FlnSZqeAt7V3CATNhLsRodcg2V9LSlxDjYSP6iUWWLdkfhVl5 yYKLBzrPFqILRO6zD6mRsVyL0/gpX1pijX2kpkzLynjHBHvqNMJGXLCmXwkiyAil6bsh R1zbokhKTcKroesH5kcDpOdHGe4kwK/lFViyYUlMGm8LAdp8JePyH495VDT0XOko7oey Q6Fw== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUIFu/lF1+f70fcId9GmVgMxWhCFJsTzjm10wFVPiM+rwDN1eWW OcOcF6Q5/DSGsr3sKUSBVhoSqGGr X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyRlDVgbFDUE1lGMfroDSkSwYNrGJJ6/Ve4FYqGQgsQuxldE/frkTYP1+6Szbq5sZug7xZOnA== X-Received: by 2002:a25:cc83:: with SMTP id l125mr29799513ybf.107.1579448774747; Sun, 19 Jan 2020 07:46:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from server.roeck-us.net ([2600:1700:e321:62f0:329c:23ff:fee3:9d7c]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id s68sm14248388ywg.69.2020.01.19.07.46.12 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Sun, 19 Jan 2020 07:46:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] hwmon: k10temp driver improvements To: Jonathan McDowell Cc: linux-hwmon@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ken Moffat References: <20200119101855.GA15446@earth.li> From: Guenter Roeck Message-ID: Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2020 07:46:11 -0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.2.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20200119101855.GA15446@earth.li> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-hwmon-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-hwmon@vger.kernel.org On 1/19/20 2:18 AM, Jonathan McDowell wrote: > > In article <20200118172615.26329-1-linux@roeck-us.net> (earth.lists.linux-kernel) you wrote: >> This patch series implements various improvements for the k10temp driver. > ... >> 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: > > Tested-By: Jonathan McDowell > Thanks! > Tested on a Ryzen 7 2700 (patched on top of 5.4.13): > > | k10temp-pci-00c3 > | Adapter: PCI adapter > | Vcore: +0.80 V > | Vsoc: +0.81 V > | Tdie: +37.0°C > | Tctl: +37.0°C > | Icore: +8.31 A > | Isoc: +6.86 A > > Like the 1300X case I see a discrepancy compared to what the nct6779 > driver says Vcore is: > > | nct6779-isa-0290 > | Adapter: ISA adapter > | Vcore: +0.33 V (min = +0.00 V, max = +1.74 V) I see that on all of my boards as well (3900X, different boards and board vendors), with temperatures reported by the Super-IO chip sometimes as low as 0.18V (!). Yet, there is a clear correlation of that voltage with CPU load. I suspect the measurement by the Super-IO chip is a different voltage. I don't think there is anything we can do about that without access to more information. > | in1: +0.32 V (min = +0.00 V, max = +0.00 V) ALARM > | AVCC: +3.39 V (min = +0.00 V, max = +0.00 V) ALARM > | +3.3V: +3.39 V (min = +0.00 V, max = +0.00 V) ALARM > | in4: +1.88 V (min = +0.00 V, max = +0.00 V) ALARM > | in5: +0.82 V (min = +0.00 V, max = +0.00 V) ALARM > | in6: +0.30 V (min = +0.00 V, max = +0.00 V) ALARM > | 3VSB: +3.42 V (min = +0.00 V, max = +0.00 V) ALARM > | Vbat: +3.25 V (min = +0.00 V, max = +0.00 V) ALARM > | in9: +0.00 V (min = +0.00 V, max = +0.00 V) > | in10: +0.22 V (min = +0.00 V, max = +0.00 V) ALARM > | in11: +1.06 V (min = +0.00 V, max = +0.00 V) ALARM > | in12: +1.70 V (min = +0.00 V, max = +0.00 V) ALARM > | in13: +1.04 V (min = +0.00 V, max = +0.00 V) ALARM > | in14: +1.79 V (min = +0.00 V, max = +0.00 V) ALARM > | fan1: 0 RPM (min = 0 RPM) > | fan2: 1708 RPM (min = 0 RPM) > | fan3: 0 RPM (min = 0 RPM) > | fan4: 0 RPM (min = 0 RPM) > | fan5: 0 RPM (min = 0 RPM) > | SYSTIN: +33.0°C (high = +0.0°C, hyst = +0.0°C) ALARM > | sensor = thermistor > | CPUTIN: -62.5°C (high = +80.0°C, hyst = +75.0°C) > | sensor = thermistor > | AUXTIN0: +79.0°C sensor = thermistor > | AUXTIN1: +96.0°C sensor = thermistor > | AUXTIN2: +23.0°C sensor = thermistor > | AUXTIN3: -22.0°C sensor = thermistor > | SMBUSMASTER 0: +39.0°C > | PCH_CHIP_CPU_MAX_TEMP: +0.0°C > | PCH_CHIP_TEMP: +0.0°C > | PCH_CPU_TEMP: +0.0°C > | intrusion0: ALARM > | intrusion1: ALARM > | beep_enable: disabled > > I suspect the nct6779 is not reporting correctly (or needs some > configuration) here, as I see that's what Ken is using with his 1300X as > well. > Initially I thought the voltage reported by the Super-IO chip would help us understand what is going on, but that is not really the case. The problem with Ken's board is that idle current and voltage are very high. The idle voltage claims to be higher than the voltage under load, which doesn't really make sense. This is only reflected in the voltage and current reported by the CPU, but not by the voltage reported by the Super-IO chip. Thanks, Guenter