Hi, On Fri, Jun 09, 2017 at 09:16:01AM +0300, Paul Kocialkowski wrote: > Le jeudi 08 juin 2017 à 21:27 +0200, Sebastian Reichel a écrit : > > Hi, > > > > On Thu, Jun 08, 2017 at 01:08:52PM +0300, Paul Kocialkowski wrote: > > > > > On Wed, 2017-06-07 at 09:52 +0200, Pavel Machek wrote: > > > > > > > [0]: > > > > > > > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux. > > > > > > > git/ > > > > > > > comm > > > > > > > it/? > > > > > > > h=v4.12-rc4&id=7f93e1fa032bb5ee19b868b9649bc98c82553003 > > > > > > > > > > > > Is there some documentation that explains what different power > > > > > > supply > > > > > > statuses mean? Because without that, we can have long and useless > > > > > > discussions. > > > > > > > > > > Well, I couldn't really find much except the following from > > > > > Documentation/ > > > > > (which is not that helpful, and the BATTERY_STATUS_* don't seem to > > > > > exist > > > > > anymore): > > > > > > > > > > " STATUS - this attribute represents operating status (charging, full, > > > > > discharging (i.e. powering a load), etc.). This corresponds to > > > > > BATTERY_STATUS_* values, as defined in battery.h. " > > > > > > > > > > Generally speaking, I think the question to be asked is what > > > > > information > > > > > users > > > > > will be interested in in each scenario we have to consider. > > > > > > > > Hmm. We really should add some documentation :-(. > > > > > > Maybe we should start a new thread about this to give it more visibility. > > > That way, PM maintainers could weigh-in and share thoughts. > > > > > > I definitely agree there is a need to clarify what we want to report to > > > userspace given the various scenarios we've been discussing. > > > > +1 for extension and update of documentation. If its known, that > > the battery is trickle charged, it should report FULL. No need > > to annoy people by constantly updating the status. Think of it > > being mapped directly to a status LED. Of course the CURRENT/ENERGY > > properties should still be updated, so that anyone interested in > > the details can see them. > > Agreed. Do ou think there is a need to start a specific discussion about > various scenarios and how to handle them or do shall we just use common sense > here?
I suggest to use common sense and if anything is unclear send a documentation patch, so that we have a basis for discussion. -- Sebastian
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
