Date: Sat, 6 Mar 2004 11:18:32 +1030 From: "Daniel O'Connor" <doconnor@gsoft.com.au> To: "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com> Cc: nate@root.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/usr.sbin/acpi/acpiconf acpiconf.c Message-ID: <200403061118.32829.doconnor@gsoft.com.au> In-Reply-To: <20040305.113544.68047468.imp@bsdimp.com> References: <200403051335.55836.doconnor@gsoft.com.au> <20040305101907.P30482@root.org> <20040305.113544.68047468.imp@bsdimp.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, 6 Mar 2004 05:05, M. Warner Losh wrote: > I've just added the following, based on the other ioctl that you can > get battery info from: > > State: Present > Rate: 50000 mWh > Cap: 50000 mWh > Volt: 10.0 V > > Note: My battery/ACPI has a bug where 'RATE' and 'CAP' are always the > same number. I have a second bug where the CAP is listed as being > more than the last full capacity of the battery. This makes it very > hard to do estimates for remaining battery life, but I'm not sure what > can be done about it. I think you have to massage the data a fair bit to throw obvious outliers away. Also I believe most implementations produce totally bogus values during charging so you ignore rate when the battery is charging. > I see value in being able to get to the raw battery information from > whatever system is present. > > Now, having said that, I have no problems with there being a unified > interface also. I don't think that we can shoe-horn all systems into > providing all this information. I think it would be sensible to leave /dev/apm as is since a lot of applications already know how to talk to it.. -- Daniel O'Connor software and network engineer for Genesis Software - http://www.gsoft.com.au "The nice thing about standards is that there are so many of them to choose from." -- Andrew Tanenbaum GPG Fingerprint - 9A8C 569F 685A D928 5140 AE4B 319B 41F4 5D17 FDD5
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200403061118.32829.doconnor>