Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 8 Dec 2007 01:23:54 -0800 | From | Andrew Morton <> | Subject | Re: 2.6.24-rc4-git5: Reported regressions from 2.6.23 |
| |
On Sat, 8 Dec 2007 09:28:15 +0100 Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> wrote:
> > * Fabio Comolli <fabio.comolli@gmail.com> wrote: > > > <snip> > > > > > Subject : Battery shows up twice in kpowersave > > > Submitter : Rolf Eike Beer <eike-kernel@sf-tec.de> > > > References : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9494 > > > Handled-By : Alexey Starikovskiy <astarikovskiy@suse.de> > > > Patch : > > > > > > > I don't think that this is a regression: I reported on RedHat bugzilla > > when I switched from F7 to F8 and I was using 2.6.23.8 at that time. > > It looks to me an HAL regression, but of course I may be wrong :-) as > > the reported bisected to a bad commit. > > > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=373041 > > > > By the way, I now switched to Fedrora Rawhide with a 2.6.24-rc4-git5 > > custom kernel and Gnome desktop and the problem is still present, even > > with gnome-power-manager. > > to me this looks like an ABI regression - utilities should work without > change. Something changed in /sys output that caused HAL to think that > there are two batteries:
Yep. Although HAL is of course a most special case of "userspace".
> | The output of lshal shows that there are two UDI's with > | info.capabilities = { 'battery' }: > | > | udi = '/org/freedesktop/Hal/devices/acpi_BAT0' > | udi = '/org/freedesktop/Hal/devices/computer_power_supply_0' > > whether it's a HAL bug or a kernel bug, the original state should be > restored and it should be worked out without breaking users of older HAL > versions.
"breaking users of older HAL versions" == "breaking machines".
The patch should be reverted. Do we know which one it was?
> grumble: way too many times do various system utilities break when i > upgrade the kernel on my laptop. Maybe a new debug mechanism: we should > start fingerprinting the exact /sys and /proc output and enforce that > it's immutable across kernel releases as long as the hardware is > unmodified?
That would be neat. It would need to be executed on a lot of different machines.
I wonder if there's something sneaky we can do here. Install the script in /lib/modules/$(uname -r) and then run it from the kernel when the fork count reaches 1000 ;)
(hey, I've seen worse: /proc files which start with #!/bin/sh)
| |