Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Linux In 2020 Can Finally Provide Sane Monitoring Of SATA Drive Temperatures

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by groeck View Post
    Thanks a lot for all the feedback. Regarding test coverage for drivetemp, I can only recommend for everyone - especially everyone who raised concerns here - to test it and provide feedback. The driver is only loaded on request, so anyone with concerns about performance impact can simply not load it or, to be sure, blacklist it. This is not an opt-out driver, it is an opt-in driver.
    Regarding temperature and other telemetry reporting on Ryzen CPUs, please note that AMD did not publish the necessary information which would enable any such improvements. Quite obviously at least some of that information has leaked, and the zenpower driver referenced here makes use of it. At this point I would like to point out that patches to improve the upstream k10temp driver to report the additional telemetry have before now not been posted. As a kind reminder, anyone interested in such improvements to this and other drivers is invited to submit patches for inclusion into the upstream kernel. Either case, a preliminary patch series adding more telemetry reporting to the k10temp driver is now available for testing at https://patchwork.kernel.org/project...?series=229271.
    Great many thanks, Guenter! It's great to see you here - quite unexpected!

    Now what about reviving additional data points in the coretemp driver, a feature I asked you about many years ago, and you actually implemented it, only to abandon it swiftly under some weird pretense?
    Last edited by birdie; 01-17-2020, 09:54 AM.

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by groeck View Post
      ... Either case, a preliminary patch series adding more telemetry reporting to the k10temp driver is now available for testing at https://patchwork.kernel.org/project...?series=229271.
      Thanks everyone for the test feedback. An updated version of the series is now available at https://patchwork.kernel.org/project...?series=230307. Note that I may hold the series for the 5.7 kernel; while I got a lot of test feedback, no one actually reviewed the code. I won't drop it entirely without review (it doesn't seem that risky), but that warrants a lengthy soak time in linux-next.

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by birdie View Post

        Great many thanks, Guenter! It's great to see you here - quite unexpected!

        Now what about reviving additional data points in the coretemp driver, a feature I asked you about many years ago, and you actually implemented it, only to abandon it swiftly under some weird pretense?
        I'll be happy to review and if appropriate accept respective patches. Note that the original patch included support for reporting energy values, which should be dropped. See Jean Delvare's feedback from the time for reasons.

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by groeck View Post

          I'll be happy to review and if appropriate accept respective patches. Note that the original patch included support for reporting energy values, which should be dropped. See Jean Delvare's feedback from the time for reasons.
          I'm quite sure this patch is so stale it won't apply to mainline and thus needs to be fixed/rewritten and I'm not a C programmer to do that. And I've no idea how to make the person who wrote it in the first place to get back to it. Looks like a lost case to me

          I'm pretty sure thousands of users will be happy to test it just like we're now testing your k10temp patched driver.

          Comment

          Working...
          X