Re: [PATCH 0/3] olpc-battery: add properties needed by UPower
On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 11:05:18PM +0100, Sascha Silbe wrote: With these patches applied, UPower correctly calculates Percentage, TimeToEmpty and TimeToFull for OLPC batteries. Sascha Silbe (3): olpc-battery: add support for CHARGE_FULL_DESIGN olpc-battery: add support for CHARGE_NOW olpc-battery: add support for CURRENT_NOW and VOLTAGE_NOW drivers/power/olpc_battery.c | 82 ++ 1 files changed, 82 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) Applied, thanks! -- Anton Vorontsov Email: cbouatmai...@gmail.com ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: [PATCH 0/3] olpc-battery: add properties needed by UPower
On Wed, 22 Dec 2010 03:21:42 +0300 Anton Vorontsov cbouatmai...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 11:05:18PM +0100, Sascha Silbe wrote: With these patches applied, UPower correctly calculates Percentage, TimeToEmpty and TimeToFull for OLPC batteries. Sascha Silbe (3): olpc-battery: add support for CHARGE_FULL_DESIGN olpc-battery: add support for CHARGE_NOW olpc-battery: add support for CURRENT_NOW and VOLTAGE_NOW drivers/power/olpc_battery.c | 82 ++ 1 files changed, 82 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) Technically, the patches look good. But I'm not sure about the EC/Device-tree thing. Is there any consensus? Should I just apply the patches, so the remaining issues could be fixed later? Thanks, Hi Anton, Just curious, were these ever merged? The concensus was definitely that they should be, but I notice your infradead battery-2.6 tree doesn't carry them. It would be great to get them in with your 2.6.38 pull request. ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: [PATCH 0/3] olpc-battery: add properties needed by UPower
On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 11:05:18PM +0100, Sascha Silbe wrote: With these patches applied, UPower correctly calculates Percentage, TimeToEmpty and TimeToFull for OLPC batteries. Sascha Silbe (3): olpc-battery: add support for CHARGE_FULL_DESIGN olpc-battery: add support for CHARGE_NOW olpc-battery: add support for CURRENT_NOW and VOLTAGE_NOW drivers/power/olpc_battery.c | 82 ++ 1 files changed, 82 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) Technically, the patches look good. But I'm not sure about the EC/Device-tree thing. Is there any consensus? Should I just apply the patches, so the remaining issues could be fixed later? Thanks, -- Anton Vorontsov Email: cbouatmai...@gmail.com ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: [PATCH 0/3] olpc-battery: add properties needed by UPower
On Wed, 22 Dec 2010 03:21:42 +0300 Anton Vorontsov cbouatmai...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 11:05:18PM +0100, Sascha Silbe wrote: With these patches applied, UPower correctly calculates Percentage, TimeToEmpty and TimeToFull for OLPC batteries. Sascha Silbe (3): olpc-battery: add support for CHARGE_FULL_DESIGN olpc-battery: add support for CHARGE_NOW olpc-battery: add support for CURRENT_NOW and VOLTAGE_NOW drivers/power/olpc_battery.c | 82 ++ 1 files changed, 82 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) Technically, the patches look good. But I'm not sure about the EC/Device-tree thing. Is there any consensus? Should I just apply the patches, so the remaining issues could be fixed later? Thanks, Given that OLPC machines out there currently have broken battery information with UPower and friends, I think that the patches should be applied. Doing stuff in the EC or device-tree may be done in the future, but even after it's written debugged, it will still take some time for people to upgrade their firmware. ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: [PATCH 0/3] olpc-battery: add properties needed by UPower
On Tue, 2010-12-21 at 16:43 -0800, Andres Salomon wrote: Given that OLPC machines out there currently have broken battery information with UPower and friends, I think that the patches should be applied. Doing stuff in the EC or device-tree may be done in the future, but even after it's written debugged, it will still take some time for people to upgrade their firmware. Agreed. In the general case in future though, it would be really useful if we could avoid having magic numbers like this in the kernel; we want them to come from as close to the hardware as possible. Given that we *have* a sane firmware on OLPC, we should be using it. -- dwmw2 ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
