On 10/20/09, Andrey Rahmatullin <wrar@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 10:38:17AM +0100, Alan Jenkins wrote: >> yes but if you are missing the original "enable camera by default" >> patch *which has already been merged* then you are almost certainly >> also missing the patch to enable autosuspend on uvcvideo by default. > No, I'm not missing it, I'm using .32-rc5 > >> Yeah, powertop's autosuspend recommendation is a bit outdated. > So, can I safely ignore it and assume all is right when I use latest > kernels? Sorry, I assumed this was the case but I didn't check properly. As Luca observes it's not been merged yet. <google>. The patch exists in Fedora <http://osdir.com/ml/fedora-extras-commits/2009-07/msg06079.html>. with the aim of beta-testing it <http://lkml.indiana.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0909.1/03142.html>. It's fair to say there's a degree of risk to it. UVC is a "standard" which presumably has various implementations with their own potential bugs. In the mean time - the thread I linked to includes a helpful note from Xandros. They measured that enabling the camera on the 901 model cost ~3% of overall power. I guess the argument is that it's better to waste a little power, rather than make life hard for people who install Linux themselves :-/. After all these devices are mainly shipped with Windows, and the original pre-installed Linux (which hacked around this in video applications) is not seriously maintained. The problem is that when the pre-installed OS uses the hack, the camera will be disabled in the BIOS. When you install a generic version of Linux without hacked applications, you either have eeepc-laptop enable the camera, or the user has to learn how to do it themself. I don't have a strong opinion myself, so long as it's fixed properly in the long term. Alan -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
