Re: linux-3.16.y: acpi-battery fixes

Re: linux-3.16.y: acpi-battery fixes

[Greg Kroah-Hartman]

On Sat, Sep 13, 2014 at 02:52:52PM +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> Hi Greg,
> 
> I hoped the acpi-fixes from [1] (especially [2]) would fix my shown
> "85% battery available", but a Ubuntu/trusty kernel reports the same
> (battery defect?).
> The 2nd revert is applicable, the 1st not, both are labeled with 3.16+.
> 
> Wanna pick them or have it already on your to-do?
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> Regards,
> - Sedat -
> 
> [1] http://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/rafael/linux-pm.git/log/?h=acpi-battery
> [2] http://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/rafael/linux-pm.git/commit/?h=acpi-battery&id=508b3c677601797f2d51df3df5caa436dd235cb9

First off, stable kernel questions should go to stable@vger.kernel.org,
not just to me.

Secondly, I don't understand what you are asking here.  What exact fix
in Linus's tree do you want to see in a stable backport that I haven't
taken already?  I've queued up a number of ACPI fixes for 3.16.3, are
they not sufficient?

thanks,

greg k-h

Re: linux-3.16.y: acpi-battery fixes

[Sedat Dilek]

On Sat, Sep 13, 2014 at 5:24 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman
<gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 13, 2014 at 02:52:52PM +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>> Hi Greg,
>>
>> I hoped the acpi-fixes from [1] (especially [2]) would fix my shown
>> "85% battery available", but a Ubuntu/trusty kernel reports the same
>> (battery defect?).
>> The 2nd revert is applicable, the 1st not, both are labeled with 3.16+.
>>
>> Wanna pick them or have it already on your to-do?
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> Regards,
>> - Sedat -
>>
>> [1] http://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/rafael/linux-pm.git/log/?h=acpi-battery
>> [2] http://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/rafael/linux-pm.git/commit/?h=acpi-battery&id=508b3c677601797f2d51df3df5caa436dd235cb9
>
> First off, stable kernel questions should go to stable@vger.kernel.org,
> not just to me.
>
> Secondly, I don't understand what you are asking here.  What exact fix
> in Linus's tree do you want to see in a stable backport that I haven't
> taken already?  I've queued up a number of ACPI fixes for 3.16.3, are
> they not sufficient?
>
> thanks,
>

Sorry, if I was nor precise enough and forgot about CCing the
linux-stable email-address.

With jumping to Linux v3.16.y I have 1st seen that my battery reports
85% whereas the LED shows me it's full (green vs. charging orange).
So, I hoped the fix from Bjorn fixes the issue for me but did not help here.
Those acpi-battery fixes are labeled for 3.16+, don't you get them
automatically and consider for inclusion?

No, I did not try the pending ACPI patches in the stable-queue tree.
Is there a stable-review v3.16.3-rc1 around?

- Sedat -

Re: linux-3.16.y: acpi-battery fixes

[Greg Kroah-Hartman]

On Sat, Sep 13, 2014 at 05:32:50PM +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> 
> With jumping to Linux v3.16.y I have 1st seen that my battery reports
> 85% whereas the LED shows me it's full (green vs. charging orange).
> So, I hoped the fix from Bjorn fixes the issue for me but did not help here.
> Those acpi-battery fixes are labeled for 3.16+, don't you get them
> automatically and consider for inclusion?

I do get them, so if they are marked for stable, they should be in a
future stable kernel release, no need to do anything on your end.

But note, I'm way behind in stable patches as there are about 300+
pending ones.

> No, I did not try the pending ACPI patches in the stable-queue tree.
> Is there a stable-review v3.16.3-rc1 around?

That should happen next week, until then, there is the stable-queue on
git.kernel.org if you want to see what is queued up.

thanks,

greg k-h