lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Jun]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH] eeepc-laptop: enable camera by default
From
Date
Hi Alan,

On Fri, 2009-06-05 at 16:08 +0100, Alan Jenkins wrote:
> Alan Jenkins wrote:
> > Pekka Enberg wrote:
> >> Hi Alan,
> >>
> >> On Fri, 2009-06-05 at 15:38 +0100, Alan Jenkins wrote:
> >>
> >>> Ok. I didn't bother shutting down my system, but I get a similar
> >>> difference; 16 wakeups/s disabled v.s. 25 enabled. Anecdotally,
> >>> disabling the camera does help battery life, and presumably Asus had
> >>> good reason to implement it! (The shipped OS "fixes" the usability
> >>> problem by patching the camera apps).
> >>>
> >>> BUT I found that autosuspend didn't seem to break anything, and
> >>> enabling it also got me down to 16 wakeups/s. I think this is ideal
> >>> because autosuspend is automatic so I can save power without manual
> >>> toggling.
> >>>
> >>> Here's some magic to enable autosuspend:
> >>>
> >>> # echo -n auto > /sys/bus/usb/drivers/uvcvideo/*:*/../power/level
> >>>
> >>> Ideally this wants to be enabled automatically using a udev rule.
> >>>
> >>
> >> Can the kernel do this by default for this specific driver on eeepc?
> >>
> >> Pekka
> >>
> >>
> >
> > Auto-suspend white-listing would be done on the basis of USB ids
> > (vendor, product). At the moment it's expected that userspace should
> > take ownership of it. There's no infrastructure for in-kernel
> > whitelisting. I think.
> >
> > Large lists in udev rules can work, there are already lists of USB
> > devices to set permissions for libusb access, e.g. for libmtp.
> >
> > [CC usb list - in the hope someone will point out if I got this wrong
> > :-)]
> >
> > Alan
>
> Btw I've now tested the udev rule, you can just dump this in a new
> .rules file under /etc/udev/rules.d:
>
> SUBSYSTEM=="usb", ATTR{idVendor}=="eb1a", ATTR{idProduct}=="2761", ATTR{power/level}="auto"
>
>
> Not sure who I should submit it to though :-). debian-eeepc would take
> it, but perhaps it should go in udev's default rules.

AFAIK, Kay Sievers maintains the udev rules so lets cc him. And yeah, I
totally agree that it should go to the generic ones, not to
debian-eeepc.

Pekka



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-06-05 17:17    [from the cache]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site