WMI vs Linux

WMI vs Linux

[Len Brown]

Jamey,
google stumbled across this patch:
http://www.th.ph.bham.ac.uk/staff/schofield/linux/tc1100/linux-2.6.9-tc1100-wmi.patch
with your name on it.

I was wondering if you could tell me about it.
I was just about to write a little driver that binds to PNP0C14 and tells the
user that they should not buy machines with WMI extensions and run Linux on them --
but maybe an exception to that rule already exists?

thanks,
-Len

ps. while you're at it, what is the WACF005 Wacom Digitizer device also in the patch --
I don't see that upstream either.

Re: WMI vs Linux

[Matthew Garrett]

On Wed, Mar 28, 2007 at 03:44:41PM -0400, Len Brown wrote:

> I was wondering if you could tell me about it.
> I was just about to write a little driver that binds to PNP0C14 and tells the
> user that they should not buy machines with WMI extensions and run Linux on them --
> but maybe an exception to that rule already exists?

It would be helpful to export as much WMI information as possible - we 
can supply information to utilise it via HAL, which would at least 
provide support for doing things like poking the wireless and bluetooth 
hardware on the old HP tablets.

I agree that WMI functionality is generally a bad sign, but where we can 
drive it I think we probably should be.

> ps. while you're at it, what is the WACF005 Wacom Digitizer device also in the patch --
> I don't see that upstream either.

It's handled by 8250_pnp.c now.
-- 
Matthew Garrett | mjg59@srcf.ucam.org

Re: WMI vs Linux

[Len Brown]

On Wednesday 28 March 2007 17:55, Jamey wrote:
> 
> The patch was designed for the HP TC1100 tablet computer. It has a
> builtin Wifi module whose power supply is controlled via WMI. The state
> is persistent across reboots, but I was not happy needing to have a
> Windows partition just to turn Wifi and Bluetooth on and off. Actually,
> I did not care about Bluetooth but I wanted to ensure Wifi was on. That
> part of the driver seems to work.
>
> Also, I could not find a good way to detect that it was a TC1100.

yeah, this is a problem -- as it stands (stood) the driver binds
as a generic WMI driver...

> Perhaps it should probe for PNP0C14 and the WACF005 and unload itself if
> those are not both present. Given the total lack of response I got when
> I sent that patch to LKML, I was quite amused to find it running on all
> sorts of machines because it was picked up by some distributions (e.g.,
> Mandrake, Ubuntu).

It is no longer possible to shock me with what some distros ship...

> And because of the aforementioned lack of 
> identifiers, the driver stays loaded on all sorts of machines.
> Fortunately it is rather small. If you have any suggestions, I'm willing
> to update it.
> 
> I would pretty much have to agree that WMI is unfriendly.  I had the
> spec for WMI for some of the HP laptops, NC4000 I think, but I couldn't
> really do much with it. The NC4000 ACPI seemed to be totally different
> from the TC1100 one.
> 
> But I guess this driver is one instance where Linux is able to use the
> WMI stuff.

Well, you did more with WMI than I thought would be possible on Linux.

I think at a minimum, we should have a small driver upstream that
binds on PNP0C14, spits out a message that the system has Windows
proprietary firmware extensions, and acts as a place where folks
who care about WMI them can try to hack together something useful...

> Matthew wrote:

> It would be helpful to export as much WMI information as possible - we 
> can supply information to utilise it via HAL, which would at least 
> provide support for doing things like poking the wireless and bluetooth 
> hardware on the old HP tablets.
> 
> I agree that WMI functionality is generally a bad sign, but where we can 
> drive it I think we probably should be.

Well, if you think you can do something useful with it...
My only request is that the source not live in drivers/acpi/ --
I'd rather it live with the platform specific drivers that use ACPI,
eg. drivers/misc/wmi.c  You think?
 
> > ps. while you're at it, what is the WACF005 Wacom Digitizer device also in the patch --
> > I don't see that upstream either.
> 
> It's handled by 8250_pnp.c now.

good to know.

So, do we have a volunteer to cobble together an upstream wmi.c?

thanks,
-Len

Re: WMI vs Linux

[Joshua Wise]

On Wed, 28 Mar 2007, Len Brown wrote:
> I was wondering if you could tell me about it.

FYI, to whoever decides to bring this patch forward, "bluetooth" I believe
should be changed to "backlight_control" or some such.

This patch exists in the Ubuntu kernels, too, and has been updated to work
with recent kernels there.

joshua

>
> thanks,
> -Len
>
> ps. while you're at it, what is the WACF005 Wacom Digitizer device also in the patch --
> I don't see that upstream either.
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>