acerhdf: stilll fighting between kernel and BIOS?

acerhdf: stilll fighting between kernel and BIOS?

[Adrian von Bidder]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: Text/Plain, Size: 1153 bytes --]

Heyho!

With 2.6.31 (as packaged by Debian), kernel and BIOS are still fighting over 
who controls the fan on my Acer AOA-150.

If the system is idle, I see repeated 

Nov 20 08:07:12 laeggerli kernel: [100246.224141] acerhdf: temp 51      
Nov 20 08:07:12 laeggerli kernel: [100246.272136] acerhdf: fan OFF      
Nov 20 08:07:22 laeggerli kernel: [100256.328145] acerhdf: temp 51      
Nov 20 08:07:22 laeggerli kernel: [100256.376072] acerhdf: fan OFF      

(and the fan is turned on and off accordingly, using a rather noisy speed 
for ca. .5s every time.)

As soon as the system gets a bit warmer, fan is running on low speed and the 
system is much quieter.

ISTR reading that this should have been fixed in 2.6.31, or was that wrong?  
Did anything change in current kernels or the separate releases of the 
acerhdf driver?  I might be able to run newer driver releases, or at least I 
can provide more info if desired (and if you're patient to deal with quite 
slow round trip times from my side.  It's not an urgent problem either.)


cheers
-- vbi

-- 
featured product: ClamAV Antivirus - http://www.clamav.net/

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 388 bytes --]

Re: acerhdf: stilll fighting between kernel and BIOS?

[Peter Feuerer]

Hey Adrian,

issues with AOA 150 netbooks should be solved with current 2.6.32-git tree. 
You can also try to use latest acerhdf of http://piie.net

kind regards,
--peter

Adrian von Bidder writes:

> Heyho!
> 
> With 2.6.31 (as packaged by Debian), kernel and BIOS are still fighting over 
> who controls the fan on my Acer AOA-150.
> 
> If the system is idle, I see repeated 
> 
> Nov 20 08:07:12 laeggerli kernel: [100246.224141] acerhdf: temp 51      
> Nov 20 08:07:12 laeggerli kernel: [100246.272136] acerhdf: fan OFF      
> Nov 20 08:07:22 laeggerli kernel: [100256.328145] acerhdf: temp 51      
> Nov 20 08:07:22 laeggerli kernel: [100256.376072] acerhdf: fan OFF      
> 
> (and the fan is turned on and off accordingly, using a rather noisy speed 
> for ca. .5s every time.)
> 
> As soon as the system gets a bit warmer, fan is running on low speed and the 
> system is much quieter.
> 
> ISTR reading that this should have been fixed in 2.6.31, or was that wrong?  
> Did anything change in current kernels or the separate releases of the 
> acerhdf driver?  I might be able to run newer driver releases, or at least I 
> can provide more info if desired (and if you're patient to deal with quite 
> slow round trip times from my side.  It's not an urgent problem either.)
> 
> 
> cheers
> -- vbi
> 
> -- 
> featured product: ClamAV Antivirus - http://www.clamav.net/

Re: acerhdf: stilll fighting between kernel and BIOS?

[Adrian von Bidder]

Heyho!

On Sunday 22 November 2009 22.27:50 Peter Feuerer wrote:
> issues with AOA 150 netbooks should be solved with current 2.6.32-git
>  tree. You can also try to use latest acerhdf of http://piie.net

Seems to work fine.  That was the fix I thought was already included in 
2.6.31.

thanks a lot.

-- vbi

 
> > Nov 20 08:07:12 laeggerli kernel: [100246.224141] acerhdf: temp 51
> > Nov 20 08:07:12 laeggerli kernel: [100246.272136] acerhdf: fan OFF
> > Nov 20 08:07:22 laeggerli kernel: [100256.328145] acerhdf: temp 51
> > Nov 20 08:07:22 laeggerli kernel: [100256.376072] acerhdf: fan OFF


-- 
As flies to wanton boys are we to the gods; they kill us for their sport.
		-- Shakespeare, "King Lear"

Re: acerhdf: stilll fighting between kernel and BIOS?

[Pekka Enberg]

On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 11:17 AM, Adrian von Bidder
<avbidder@fortytwo.ch> wrote:
> Heyho!
>
> On Sunday 22 November 2009 22.27:50 Peter Feuerer wrote:
>> issues with AOA 150 netbooks should be solved with current 2.6.32-git
>>  tree. You can also try to use latest acerhdf of http://piie.net
>
> Seems to work fine.  That was the fix I thought was already included in
> 2.6.31.

Is that commit ded0cdfc6a7673916b0878c32fa8ba566b4f8cdb ("acerhdf: fix
fan control for AOA150 model")? Should it go to -stable?

Re: acerhdf: stilll fighting between kernel and BIOS?

[Adrian von Bidder]

On Monday 23 November 2009 10.58:54 Pekka Enberg wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 11:17 AM, Adrian von Bidder
> 
> <avbidder@fortytwo.ch> wrote:
> > Heyho!
> >
> > On Sunday 22 November 2009 22.27:50 Peter Feuerer wrote:
> >> issues with AOA 150 netbooks should be solved with current 2.6.32-git
> >>  tree. You can also try to use latest acerhdf of http://piie.net
> >
> > Seems to work fine.  That was the fix I thought was already included in
> > 2.6.31.
> 
> Is that commit ded0cdfc6a7673916b0878c32fa8ba566b4f8cdb ("acerhdf: fix
> fan control for AOA150 model")? Should it go to -stable?

Sorry for not answering sooner.

I don't really have time to recompile / test more at this time; in any case, 
I think it's just a minor annoyance and not what I'd feed into a "fixes 
only" tree.  (I'm not involved in kernel development in any way, but I 
thought that the stable tree should be quite limited in what goes in?)

cheers
-- vbi



-- 
<towo> Alle schlauen Amerikaner arbeiten bei der NSA,
       und die dürfen nicht mit Ausländern sprechen.
        -- #Debian.DE

Re: acerhdf: stilll fighting between kernel and BIOS?

[Pekka Enberg]

Adrian von Bidder kirjoitti:
> On Monday 23 November 2009 10.58:54 Pekka Enberg wrote:
>> On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 11:17 AM, Adrian von Bidder
>>
>> <avbidder@fortytwo.ch> wrote:
>>> Heyho!
>>>
>>> On Sunday 22 November 2009 22.27:50 Peter Feuerer wrote:
>>>> issues with AOA 150 netbooks should be solved with current 2.6.32-git
>>>>  tree. You can also try to use latest acerhdf of http://piie.net
>>> Seems to work fine.  That was the fix I thought was already included in
>>> 2.6.31.
>> Is that commit ded0cdfc6a7673916b0878c32fa8ba566b4f8cdb ("acerhdf: fix
>> fan control for AOA150 model")? Should it go to -stable?
> 
> Sorry for not answering sooner.
> 
> I don't really have time to recompile / test more at this time; in any case, 
> I think it's just a minor annoyance and not what I'd feed into a "fixes 
> only" tree.  (I'm not involved in kernel development in any way, but I 
> thought that the stable tree should be quite limited in what goes in?)

Your call. The rules of stable are pretty simple: (1) the patch needs to 
fix a _real_ problem and (2) it needs to be rather small. AFAICT, both 
apply here.

			Pekka