[regression] v2.6.24-rc1-497-gb1d08ac: kde battery icon gone

[regression] v2.6.24-rc1-497-gb1d08ac: kde battery icon gone

[Thomas Meyer]

i just wanted to report this:

in v2.6.24-rc1-497-gb1d08ac the kde battery icon is no longer displayed.

with 2.6.23 shows the battery icon.

current config:

grep -i acpi .config
# Power management options (ACPI, APM)
CONFIG_ACPI=y
CONFIG_ACPI_SLEEP=y
# CONFIG_ACPI_PROCFS is not set
CONFIG_ACPI_PROC_EVENT=y
CONFIG_ACPI_AC=m
CONFIG_ACPI_BATTERY=m
CONFIG_ACPI_BUTTON=m
CONFIG_ACPI_VIDEO=m
CONFIG_ACPI_FAN=m
CONFIG_ACPI_DOCK=m
CONFIG_ACPI_BAY=m
CONFIG_ACPI_PROCESSOR=m
CONFIG_ACPI_HOTPLUG_CPU=y
CONFIG_ACPI_THERMAL=m
# CONFIG_ACPI_ASUS is not set
# CONFIG_ACPI_TOSHIBA is not set
CONFIG_ACPI_BLACKLIST_YEAR=0
CONFIG_ACPI_DEBUG=y
# CONFIG_ACPI_DEBUG_FUNC_TRACE is not set
CONFIG_ACPI_EC=y
CONFIG_ACPI_POWER=y
CONFIG_ACPI_SYSTEM=y
CONFIG_ACPI_CONTAINER=m
CONFIG_ACPI_SBS=m
CONFIG_X86_ACPI_CPUFREQ=m
# CONFIG_X86_ACPI_CPUFREQ_PROC_INTF is not set
CONFIG_HOTPLUG_PCI_ACPI=m
# CONFIG_HOTPLUG_PCI_ACPI_IBM is not set
CONFIG_PNPACPI=y
# CONFIG_THINKPAD_ACPI is not set
CONFIG_ATA_ACPI=y
# CONFIG_PATA_ACPI is not set

Re: [regression] v2.6.24-rc1-497-gb1d08ac: kde battery icon gone

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Friday, 2 November 2007 18:18, Thomas Meyer wrote:
> i just wanted to report this:
> 
> in v2.6.24-rc1-497-gb1d08ac the kde battery icon is no longer displayed.

Appropriate CCs added.

> with 2.6.23 shows the battery icon.
> 
> current config:
> 
> grep -i acpi .config
> # Power management options (ACPI, APM)
> CONFIG_ACPI=y
> CONFIG_ACPI_SLEEP=y
> # CONFIG_ACPI_PROCFS is not set
> CONFIG_ACPI_PROC_EVENT=y
> CONFIG_ACPI_AC=m
> CONFIG_ACPI_BATTERY=m
> CONFIG_ACPI_BUTTON=m
> CONFIG_ACPI_VIDEO=m
> CONFIG_ACPI_FAN=m
> CONFIG_ACPI_DOCK=m
> CONFIG_ACPI_BAY=m
> CONFIG_ACPI_PROCESSOR=m
> CONFIG_ACPI_HOTPLUG_CPU=y
> CONFIG_ACPI_THERMAL=m
> # CONFIG_ACPI_ASUS is not set
> # CONFIG_ACPI_TOSHIBA is not set
> CONFIG_ACPI_BLACKLIST_YEAR=0
> CONFIG_ACPI_DEBUG=y
> # CONFIG_ACPI_DEBUG_FUNC_TRACE is not set
> CONFIG_ACPI_EC=y
> CONFIG_ACPI_POWER=y
> CONFIG_ACPI_SYSTEM=y
> CONFIG_ACPI_CONTAINER=m
> CONFIG_ACPI_SBS=m
> CONFIG_X86_ACPI_CPUFREQ=m
> # CONFIG_X86_ACPI_CPUFREQ_PROC_INTF is not set
> CONFIG_HOTPLUG_PCI_ACPI=m
> # CONFIG_HOTPLUG_PCI_ACPI_IBM is not set
> CONFIG_PNPACPI=y
> # CONFIG_THINKPAD_ACPI is not set
> CONFIG_ATA_ACPI=y
> # CONFIG_PATA_ACPI is not set
> 
> -

Re: [regression] v2.6.24-rc1-497-gb1d08ac: kde battery icon gone

[Andrey Borzenkov]

Thomas Meyer wrote:

> i just wanted to report this:
> 
> in v2.6.24-rc1-497-gb1d08ac the kde battery icon is no longer displayed.
> 
> with 2.6.23 shows the battery icon.
> 
> current config:
> 
> grep -i acpi .config
> # Power management options (ACPI, APM)
> CONFIG_ACPI=y
> CONFIG_ACPI_SLEEP=y
> # CONFIG_ACPI_PROCFS is not set

And if you enable it (ACPI_PROCFS)?

Re: [regression] v2.6.24-rc1-497-gb1d08ac: kde battery icon gone

[Ingo Molnar]

* Andrey Borzenkov <arvidjaar@mail.ru> wrote:

> > # CONFIG_ACPI_PROCFS is not set
> 
> And if you enable it (ACPI_PROCFS)?

ACPI_PROCFS was newly introduced i think but without a 'default y' 
Kconfig entry. That was a mistake i think - it broke some power 
management tools on my laptop too.

	Ingo

Re: [regression] v2.6.24-rc1-497-gb1d08ac: kde battery icon gone

[Andrey Borzenkov]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 612 bytes --]

On Saturday 03 November 2007, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Andrey Borzenkov <arvidjaar@mail.ru> wrote:
> > > # CONFIG_ACPI_PROCFS is not set
> >
> > And if you enable it (ACPI_PROCFS)?
>
> ACPI_PROCFS was newly introduced i think but without a 'default y'
> Kconfig entry. That was a mistake i think - it broke some power
> management tools on my laptop too.
>

It is not that new but battery started to make use of it only now. It provides 
replacement interface via sysfs power_supply object; this should be supported 
by modern power tools - at least hal/kpowersave do not have any issues.

-andrey

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [regression] v2.6.24-rc1-497-gb1d08ac: kde battery icon gone

[Thomas Meyer]

Andrey Borzenkov schrieb:
> Thomas Meyer wrote:
>
>   
>> i just wanted to report this:
>>
>> in v2.6.24-rc1-497-gb1d08ac the kde battery icon is no longer displayed.
>>
>> with 2.6.23 shows the battery icon.
>>
>> current config:
>>
>> grep -i acpi .config
>> # Power management options (ACPI, APM)
>> CONFIG_ACPI=y
>> CONFIG_ACPI_SLEEP=y
>> # CONFIG_ACPI_PROCFS is not set
>>     
>
> And if you enable it (ACPI_PROCFS)?
>   
And there it is again...

Re: [regression] v2.6.24-rc1-497-gb1d08ac: kde battery icon gone

[Ingo Molnar]

* Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl> wrote:

> > See this commit:
> > 
> > commit fb804714560463534ebcb538a3b0a3c687a830ec
> > Author: Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>
> > Date:   Tue Jul 24 01:50:46 2007 -0400
> > 
> >     ACPI: Kconfig: CONFIG_ACPI_PROCFS now defaults to N
> > 
> >     delete "default y" from CONFIG_ACPI_PROCFS
> >     (effectively making the default 'N')
> > 
> >     List exactly what /proc files this option controls,
> >     and clarify that it doesn't change non-deprecated files.
> > 
> >     Signed-off-by: Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>
> > 
> > So at least battery change should have added /proc/acpi/battery to this list.
> 
> IMHO, the source of the problem is the battery change that has 
> introduced the dependency on ACPI_PROCFS _although_ it's unset by 
> default and that is a regression (ie. confuses users with older user 
> space).

"older user space" meaning just about every Linux box that is out there 
at the moment. So this is a regression, the user does not care why it 
happened, and needs fixing.

> > May be we need separate ACPI_PROCFS_xxx for every subsystem.
> 
> Well, I'm not sure.  I think that documenting the dependency should be 
> sufficient.

No. We never remove a bit of relied-on API from the kernel like that. At 
minimum it must go through a long deprecation cycle before it's turned 
off by default. Really, is this some sort of weird "how can we piss off 
and lose as many beta testers as possible in the shortest amount of 
time" contest? Will people search for a few new lines of documentation 
(out of the 1 million lines of kernel code that 2.6.24 changes) when 
'make oldconfig' breaks their laptop setup - or will they just go over 
to a more tester-friendly project? Compatibility is our utmost priority 
(and your regressions list is a very good tool for us to keep 
compatibility), especially in an incredibly easy case like this where 
the fix is 1 changed byte with no harm done to anyone.

	Ingo