On Mon, 2009-09-07 at 13:29 +0100, Alan Jenkins wrote: > Maxim Levitsky wrote: > > On Tue, 2009-05-12 at 15:51 +0100, Alan Jenkins wrote: > > > >> Keeping this device around lets userspace know that we have a battery > >> bay, even if there is nothing in it at the moment. This is what every > >> other battery driver does, so ACPI should do it as well. > >> > >> There is no reason to preserve the old behaviour. We now correctly > >> provide the "present" attribute, which will return "0" when the battery > >> is removed. HAL was already trying to check this attribute, so > >> it should be fine. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Alan Jenkins <alan-jenkins@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >> > > > > What happened to this patch? > > > > I still get the issue this patch attempts to fix: > > > > maxim@maxim-laptop:~/software/kernel/linux-2.6$ > > ls /sys/class/power_supply/ > > AC > > maxim@maxim-laptop:~/software/kernel/linux-2.6$ > > ls /sys/class/power_supply/ > > AC BAT0 > > maxim@maxim-laptop:~/software/kernel/linux-2.6$ > > ls /sys/class/power_supply/ > > AC > > maxim@maxim-laptop:~/software/kernel/linux-2.6$ uname -r > > 2.6.31-rc8-next-20090904-next > > maxim@maxim-laptop:~/software/kernel/linux-2.6$ > > > > > > When I unplug the battery, its sysfs entry disappears. > > Thus if system was booted without battery, there will be no way to know > > system has one. > > > > This patch doesn't apply. > > > > I rebased these patches a while back > > http://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/33118/ > http://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/33119/ > http://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/33120/ > > you should find these will still apply. > > Regards > Alan Any progress on adding special battery bay device? Best regards, Maxim Levitsky -- 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
