On Sun, 2010-12-12 at 06:39 +0800, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> Hi Len,
>
> The following three patches seem to have been dropped from your 'test' branch.
>
> If that happened by accident, please reapply. Otherwise, please let me know
> what's wrong with the patches so that I can fix them.
>
> [1/3] - Make fujitsu_laptop use acpi_bus_update_power() instead of
> acpi_bus_get_power() which is unsafe.
ïIt seems that the function of acpi_bus_update_power not only obtains
the current power state, but also set the corresponding power state.
Right?
If the device reports the bogus power state, maybe we will set the
incorrect power state for the corresponding device when using the
function of acpi_bus_update_power instead of acpi_bus_get_power. In such
case maybe the device can't work well.
The bogus power state is reported for some devices on some laptops. For
example:
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8049
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11000
Thanks.
Yakui
>
> [2/3] - Drop acpi_bus_get_power() which is unsafe and has no users.
>
> [3/3] - Do not call __acpi_bus_get_power() from acpi_bus_set_power()
> and remove acpi_power_nocheck that is not necessary any more.
>
> Without these patches the power resources handling rework is incomplete and
> the code will not work correctly in some situations.
>
> Thanks,
> Rafael
>
> --
> 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
--
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
