Re: first shoot for smartbattery (was Re: Re: i2c-acpi-ec.c)

Pedro Venda
2005-01-01T17:05:23Z

Mathias Weyland wrote:

>>You can find this at http://www.poupinou.org/acpi/smartbatt/
>>Take one of the smartbatt.tar.{gz,bz2} and follow the README after
>>unpacking it, and hopefully a ./smartbatt will give you correct battery
>>informations (who knows).
>
>
> Ok, here's what's happening:
>
> corcovado:/usr/src/smartbatt# ./smartbattery
> Error: No i2c-bus specified!
> Syntax: smartbatt I2CBUS
> Installed I2C busses:
> i2c-1 unknown ACPI EC SMBus adapter at 0018
> Algorithm unavailable
> i2c-0 unknown SMBus I801 adapter at 1880
> Algorithm unavailable
> corcovado:/usr/src/smartbatt# ./smartbattery 1
> current: 65535 mA
> remain: 65535 mA or mWh
> time to empty: 65535 minutes
> time to full: 65535 minutes
> temperature: 6280.5 C
> voltage: 65535 mV

same here.

>
> The values are wrong, but I guess you helped me a lot. I'll dive into the
> code this afternoon and I'll try to nail down the problem. As for now, what
> I can tell you is that the base address has been detected correctly. From my
> dsdt.asl:
>
> Device (SMBC)
> {
> Name (_HID, "ACPI0001")
> Name (_EC, 0x1820)
> Device (SBS0)
> {
> Name (_HID, "ACPI0002")
> Name (_SBS, 0x01)
> }
> }
>
>
> Loading the module shows:
>
> i2c_acpi_ec: disagrees about version of symbol struct_module
> base: 0x18 alert: 0x20
> i2c-acpi-ec.c: ACPI EC SMBus adapter at 0x18

same here.

>
> So at least that is working.
>
> But something puzzeled me a bit:
>
> corcovado:/home/lea# i2cdetect 1
> WARNING! This program can confuse your I2C bus, cause data loss and worse!
> I will probe file /dev/i2c-1.
> I will probe address range 0x03-0x77.
> Continue? [Y/n]
> 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 a b c d e f
> 00: XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX
> 10: XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX
> 20: XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX
> 30: XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX
> 40: XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX
> 50: XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX
> 60: XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX
> 70: XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX
>
> At least the output differs from what Pedro (IIRC) got in October.

same here. now I get the same as you.

>
> Regards & thank you very much for the effort!

indeed! thanks for the very helpful work with the driver.

regards,
pedro venda.
--

Pedro João Lopes Venda
email: pjlv-aHmAgkVUFT6Joy8PIJZ9VA@public.gmane.org