preparing pcf50633 for upstream

Andy Green andy at
Thu Oct 2 20:09:39 CEST 2008

Hash: SHA1

Somebody in the thread at some point said:

| On my laptops, it's been years since I last felt the need to have
| > anything that looked like APM, so it always puzzled me a little
| > why we had that seemingly obsolete thing in Openmoko.
| >
| > So, two questions:
| > 1) is APM emulation something new code should use at all ?


| > 2) would user space developers cry bitter tears if we removed it ?


...if someone writes a battery class driver for GTA01.

|> | It seems that we all agree that the APM interface should go. That's
|> Someone needs to test that the "apm" applet that folks are using in
|> userspace does not actually need APM emulation in kernel.  It kinda
|> sounds like they should be related.
|> Why don't you cook a kernel with the APM emulation unconfigured, and
|> test it?
| I've commented out the apm emulation code in pcf50633.c and
| apm_get_power_status set to NULL. This kernel booted up fine. But when
| I ran the "apm" command, it said "Battery critically low" or something
| like that, a false positive.
| How exactly do I test it ?

You have tested it, it breaks for battery status.  I have often read
people using apm -s to trigger a suspend, I don't know if anyone uses it
for anything else in any of the distros like battery status.

If it still runs enough for apm -s, and nobody wants to save it, I guess
it can go.

cc-d this to devel list so anyone who likes APM emulation can't complain
after it is gone.

- -Andy
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora -


More information about the devel mailing list