linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] battery: Fix charge_now returned by broken batteries

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 05 Oct 2009 01:36:56 +0400
From:	Alexey Starikovskiy <astarikovskiy@...e.de>
To:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
CC:	Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com>,
	Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@....eng.br>,
	linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] battery: Fix charge_now returned by broken batteries

Hi Rafael,

This is not my rule, it was/is the rule of power device class. If you do not agree to it, please change
appropriate documentation.

Regards,
Alex.

Rafael J. Wysocki пишет:
> On Sunday 04 October 2009, Alexey Starikovskiy wrote:
>> Hi Miguel,
> 
> Hi Alex,
> 
>> I am going to reject your patch on the basis, that the battery driver should report only
>> information it gained from battery hardware, not interpret it in any way.
>> As your patch fall into "interpret" category, it does not belong in the kernel and battery
>> driver in particular. You may suggest it to any/all user space battery monitoring applications,
>> this is the place for "interpretations".
> 
> Well, we do quirks for PCI devices, suspend quirks etc. in the kernel, so I'm
> not really sure we should use the "no interpretation" as a general rule.  IMO,
> if there's a known broken system needing a quirk, it may just be more
> reasonable to put the quirk into the kernel than to put it into every single
> user application out there.
> 
> In this particular case we have an evidently quirky hardware (or BIOS) and it's
> not a fundamentally wrong idea to try to address that problem in the kernel.
> 
> Thanks,
> Rafael

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/