From owner-freebsd-acpi@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Dec 20 16:37:43 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F55616A4CE for ; Mon, 20 Dec 2004 16:37:43 +0000 (GMT) Received: from postal2.es.net (postal2.es.net [198.128.3.206]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00FD543D41 for ; Mon, 20 Dec 2004 16:37:43 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from oberman@es.net) Received: from ptavv.es.net ([198.128.4.29]) by postal2.es.net (Postal Node 2) with ESMTP (SSL) id IBA74465; Mon, 20 Dec 2004 08:37:42 -0800 Received: from ptavv (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ptavv.es.net (Tachyon Server) with ESMTP id 60FC05D09; Mon, 20 Dec 2004 08:37:37 -0800 (PST) To: Nate Lawson In-reply-to: Your message of "Sun, 19 Dec 2004 21:04:13 PST." <41C65D4D.8030807@root.org> Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 08:37:36 -0800 From: "Kevin Oberman" Message-Id: <20041220163737.60FC05D09@ptavv.es.net> cc: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Improper failure declarations for cmbat X-BeenThere: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: ACPI and power management development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 16:37:43 -0000 > Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 21:04:13 -0800 > From: Nate Lawson > > Kevin Oberman wrote: > > I have an IBM T30 with 2 batteries. Yesterday I was running on battery > > for a while and completely exhausted the secondary battery. The primary > > never dropped below about 75%. > > > > When the secondary dropped, acpi_cmbat1 started spitting out large > > numbers of errors. > > acpi_cmbat1: critically low charge! > > While the messages are correct, they are not really appropriate when the > > primary battery is fully charged and is both annoying and fills up the > > log, possibly causing "real" messages to be missed. I would suggest that > > no battery critical warning be issued unless all batteries are critical. > > Thanks for the bug report. I just committed a small fix to only report > the message once. Checking all batteries is a larger change that we can > examine in the future. Nate, Thanks for the quick fix! I don't see and MFC entry on the patch. Would that be possible (in a few days, of course)? -- R. Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer Energy Sciences Network (ESnet) Ernest O. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab) E-mail: oberman@es.net Phone: +1 510 486-8634