> No, the problem we discussed here is not a regression.
> http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10658
> And the patch just works for the laptops that:
> 1. without passive trip point
> 2. with a passive trip point that doesn't help because it is too close
> to the critical trip point.
Ok.
On Tue, 2008-08-12 at 16:00 +0800, Andi Kleen wrote:
> Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 11, 2008 at 04:14:14PM +0200, Thomas Renninger wrote:
> >
> >> So what is the status here, how should we proceed?
> >> This isn't applied to any tree yet?
> >> IMO you should send those two with below fixe
On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 10:00:26AM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> The problem seems to be that some people report this as a regression.
> So either:
Yeah. I'm unconvinced that this is the right solution for the Thinkpad
case.
> - It's an regression. Then something must have been changed. Do we know
Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 11, 2008 at 04:14:14PM +0200, Thomas Renninger wrote:
>
>> So what is the status here, how should we proceed?
>> This isn't applied to any tree yet?
>> IMO you should send those two with below fixed and Andi could queue them on
>> the test branch and keep it a
On Mon, 2008-08-11 at 20:33 +0800, Thomas Renninger wrote:
> Is this a bug in current drivers/thermal/Kconfig code:
> config THERMAL_HWMON
> bool "Hardware monitoring support"
> depends on HWMON=y || HWMON=THERMAL
> Should the last line be:
> depends on HWMON
> ?
No, for th
On Mon, Aug 11, 2008 at 04:14:14PM +0200, Thomas Renninger wrote:
> So what is the status here, how should we proceed?
> This isn't applied to any tree yet?
> IMO you should send those two with below fixed and Andi could queue them on
> the test branch and keep it a while there.
I posted them, g
On Monday 11 August 2008 14:55:19 Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 11, 2008 at 02:33:22PM +0200, Thomas Renninger wrote:
> > ---
> > include/linux/thermal.h
> > struct thermal_zone_device_ops {
> > ..
> > int (*get_temp) (struct thermal_zone_device *, char *);
> > ..
> > }
>
> Y
On Mon, Aug 11, 2008 at 02:33:22PM +0200, Thomas Renninger wrote:
> ---
> include/linux/thermal.h
> struct thermal_zone_device_ops {
> ..
> int (*get_temp) (struct thermal_zone_device *, char *);
> ..
> }
You're missing the cleanup patches for the thermal layer that I posted
at
On Monday 11 August 2008 13:30:05 Andi Kleen wrote:
> Do we have a final patch for this yet? I assume it needs at least more
> entries in the DMI list as Henrique pointed out?
On longterm I like to try to fix this in a more generic way:
Use Matthew's basic idea/patch of introducing a passive trip
Do we have a final patch for this yet? I assume it needs at least more
entries in the DMI list as Henrique pointed out?
-Andi
-
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest L
On Thursday 31 July 2008 03:02:01 Zhang Rui wrote:
> On Wed, 2008-07-30 at 15:56 +0200, Thomas Renninger wrote:
> > This came in in OpenSUSE 10.3. When we still had overriden thermal
> > polling frequency (what we probably will do again soon). It has been
> > tested that specific ThinkPads do not t
On Wed, 30 Jul 2008, Chris Hanson wrote:
> I'm wondering if this thread is about something similar to a problem
> I've seen. My T61p often locks up when the outside temperature is
> high or when it is humid, and the CPU temperature is high (but less
> than 85C). Is this like the symptom you're ad
On Wed, 2008-07-30 at 15:56 +0200, Thomas Renninger wrote:
> This came in in OpenSUSE 10.3. When we still had overriden thermal polling
> frequency (what we probably will do again soon). It has been tested that
> specific ThinkPads do not throw a thermal event when exceeding the passive
> trip poin
I'm wondering if this thread is about something similar to a problem
I've seen. My T61p often locks up when the outside temperature is
high or when it is humid, and the CPU temperature is high (but less
than 85C). Is this like the symptom you're addressing?
--
On Wednesday 30 July 2008 19:52:27 Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Jul 2008, Thomas Renninger wrote:
> > frequency (what we probably will do again soon). It has been tested that
> > specific ThinkPads do not throw a thermal event when exceeding the
> > passive trip point. Even therm
Thomas Renninger wrote:
> This came in in OpenSUSE 10.3. When we still had overriden thermal polling
> frequency (what we probably will do again soon). It has been tested that
> specific ThinkPads do not throw a thermal event when exceeding the passive
> trip point. Even thermal polling was not eno
On Wed, 30 Jul 2008, Thomas Renninger wrote:
> frequency (what we probably will do again soon). It has been tested that
> specific ThinkPads do not throw a thermal event when exceeding the passive
> trip point. Even thermal polling was not enough...
Urgh.
> + DMI_MATCH(DMI_BIO
On Wednesday 30 July 2008 18:17:48 Andi Kleen wrote:
> Thomas Renninger wrote:
> > This came in in OpenSUSE 10.3. When we still had overriden thermal
> > polling frequency (what we probably will do again soon). It has been
> > tested that specific ThinkPads do not throw a thermal event when
> > exc
This came in in OpenSUSE 10.3. When we still had overriden thermal polling
frequency (what we probably will do again soon). It has been tested that
specific ThinkPads do not throw a thermal event when exceeding the passive
trip point. Even thermal polling was not enough...
As no other solution has
19 matches
Mail list logo
