From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: anton.vorontsov@linaro.org (Anton Vorontsov) Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 17:44:43 -0800 Subject: [PATCH 06/18] power: ab8500_bm: Recharge condition not optimal for battery In-Reply-To: <1357909986-9262-7-git-send-email-lee.jones@linaro.org> References: <1357909986-9262-1-git-send-email-lee.jones@linaro.org> <1357909986-9262-7-git-send-email-lee.jones@linaro.org> Message-ID: <20130116014442.GA17659@lizard.fhda.edu> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 01:12:54PM +0000, Lee Jones wrote: > From: Marcus Cooper > > Today the battery recharge is determined with a voltage threshold. This > voltage threshold is only valid when the battery is relaxed. In charging > algorithm the voltage read is the loaded battery voltage and no > compensation is done to get the relaxed voltage. When maintenance > charging is not selected, this makes the recharging condition to almost > immediately activate when there is a discharge present on the battery. > > Depending on which vendor the battery comes from this behavior can wear > out the battery much faster than normal. > > The fuelgauge driver is responsible to monitor the actual battery > capacity and is able to estimate the remaining capacity. It is better to > use the remaining capacity as a limit to determine when battery should > be recharged. > > Signed-off-by: Lee Jones > Signed-off-by: Marcus Cooper > Reviewed-by: Hakan BERG > Reviewed-by: Jonas ABERG > --- > + .maint_thres = 95, > .user_cap_limit = 15, > .maint_thres = 97, > }; 95 or 97? These are both specified. I removed 97, assuming it was a merge error on your side. But please double check, it could be that you really want 97 here.