Disable CONFIG_ACPI_SYSFS_POWER?

[Kyle McMartin]

On Sun, Feb 17, 2008 at 09:08:02PM -0500, Chuck Ebbert wrote:
> On 02/16/2008 06:53 AM, drago01 wrote:
> > Hi,
> > I tested the kernel-2.6.24.2-3.fc8 (downloaded the x86_64 build
> > directly) on my laptop.
> > Hal detects two batteries because it looks in sysfs and in procfs for
> > the battery info. I tryed to apply the patch from the hal-list which
> > causes hal to not look in procfs but in sysfs only when the sysfs info
> > is available. The problem with this is that the info in sysfs is broken
> > (capcity 3.0 Wh etc while the procfs info is correct 45Wh).
> > I would suggest to set CONFIG_ACPI_SYSFS_POWER to n because the procfs
> > info already provides this data for userspace and does not report broken
> > values.
> > 
> 
> We should be enabling either one or the other, not both.
> 

my logic was people could be running rawhide kernels on old userspace
(i do this, for instance.)

> For Fedora 9 maybe it should be the sysfs interface if it works.
> 

i don't really see a harm in having both.

> For 8 it should be only procfs to be backwards compatible. I'll do that.
> 

agreed, don't want to tempt fate on f8...

cheers, kyle

> _______________________________________________
> Fedora-kernel-list mailing list
> Fedora-kernel-list at redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-kernel-list
>