From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alexey Starikovskiy Subject: Re: ACPI: Always return valid 'status' from acpi_battery_get_property() Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2007 21:41:08 +0300 Message-ID: <4741D8C4.7020501@suse.de> References: <87640d1wmi.fsf@shaolin.home.digitalvampire.org> <4732C8D3.605@suse.de> <20071108144207.GA8814@khazad-dum.debian.net> <4741858D.9020802@gmail.com> <20071119183606.GE3580@khazad-dum.debian.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from charybdis-ext.suse.de ([195.135.221.2]:47813 "EHLO emea5-mh.id5.novell.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751011AbXKSSkx (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Nov 2007 13:40:53 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20071119183606.GE3580@khazad-dum.debian.net> Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org To: Henrique de Moraes Holschuh Cc: Alexey Starikovskiy , Roland Dreier , Len Brown , linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, Rolf Eike Beer Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote: > On Mon, 19 Nov 2007, Alexey Starikovskiy wrote: >> Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote: >>> On Thu, 08 Nov 2007, Alexey Starikovskiy wrote: >>>>> handle explicitly. There doesn't seem to be any status enum value >>>>> defined that makes more sense than 'unknown' for a battery at a >>>>> critical charge level. >>> Maybe one should be added? >>> >> There is already "Critical" field for capacity. > > Ah, that's ok, then. > >> It seems that the state should be limited to only 3 options: >> charging, discharging, and not charging. > > I'd call "not charging", "idle" instead. After all, discharging IS not > charging as well... > There is power_supply interface, and authors already declared this "not charging" state, also they already failed to invent "idle". So, you might send them patch, renaming "not charging" to "idle"... Regards, Alex.