Re: 3.14-rc: /proc/acpi/battery gone?

[Lan Tianyu]

On 04/20/2014 09:09 PM, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> > > >        I just glance wmbattery code. I find the code in the acpi.c is already
> > > > using the new sysfs battery interfaces, right?
> > >
> > > By default, wmbattery appears to default to using upower as abstraction
> > > level, instead of querying sysfs itself directly.
> > >
> > > http://git.kitenet.net/?p=wmbattery.git;a=blob;f=autoconf/makeinfo.in;hb=HEAD
> > >
> > > which sets USE_UPOWER=1 by default.
> > >
> > > If USE_UPOWER=0 is set explicitly for the build, it reverts back to
> > > direct sysfs parsing - and yes, it does appear to adhere to the current
> > > sysfs API properly.
> > >
> > > The last remains, and the ability to parse procfs (which hasn't been
> > > default for quite some time already, in favour of using hal as
> > > abstraction layer) has finally been removed in
> > >
> > > http://git.kitenet.net/?p=wmbattery.git;a=commitdiff;h=833eb63a5ce4f2fb712a201b1db4f2db1700fddb
> > >
> > > The switch from procfs parsing to hal (by default at least) in turn
> > > happened with
> > >
> > > http://git.kitenet.net/?p=wmbattery.git;a=commitdiff;h=63c3d1a0b11e8ade1a5612bb5baa3d92e153bbbe
> > >
> > > in 2008 (before Debian squeeze/ oldstable). I have not investigated if
> > > hal then read from procfs or sysfs, but wmbattery at least didn't read
> > > from procfs itself, unless explicitly told to do so (USE_HAL=0) during
> > > the build since mid 2008.
> > >
> > > The current version of wmbattery however will never try to access
> > > /proc/acpi, the current version no longer knows of its existence.
> > >
> > > [Again, I'm not familiar with wmbattery myself and have never run it]
> >
> > Stefan,
> >
> > Thanks for looking into this. The newest wmbattery version indeed
> > supports upower. However, I haven't figured out how to get it to work.
> > That's obviously not the kernel's fault, but an unfortunate reality.
> > It seems to really want dbus to be running, but when I start dbus
> > (which nothing else on my system needs, apparently), it just hangs. My
> > knowledge of these things is, (un)fortunately non-existent, so I just
> > gave up on the upower approach. Running something as heavy as dbus
> > just for a silly dock app seems... silly as well.
>
> Any news on this one?
>
> It seems that delaying fsck on battery power also relies on
> /proc/acpi/battery...

Ok. I will prepare a patch to recover /proc/acpi/battery.

> https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=12168
>
> 									Pavel

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/