Kernel patch for AC notifier chain

[Felix Kuehling]

The patch has been accepted upstream:
http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/lenb/linux-acpi-2.6.git;a=commit;h=68b92b567c0c5e6f4d0b264d438f97ee5ccbdccc

Regards,
  Felix

On Tue, 2009-09-01 at 11:43 -0600, Tim Gardner wrote:
> Applied. Please continue to pursue this for upstream inclusion.
> 
> rtg
> 
> Felix Kuehling wrote:
> > Really adding kernel-team at lists.ubuntu.com, moving Larry to BCC
> > 
> > Please consider the attached patch for inclusion in Ubuntu 9.10.
> > 
> > Without this patch the early-look fglrx driver that will be included in
> > Ubuntu 9.10 will be unable to respond to AC/DC events. This may have
> > detrimental effects on the power consumption on mobile devices.
> > Depending on the power consumption and battery power, this may even
> > result in hardware damage.
> > 
> > We need to submit (or not submit) our corresponding driver change for
> > the driver release to Canonical by tonight. By then I need to know
> > whether Ubuntu 9.10 is going to ship with the patch or not.
> > 
> > Regards,
> >   Felix
> > 
> > On Tue, 2009-09-01 at 06:08 -0600, Tim Gardner wrote:
> >> Felix,
> >>
> >> Please send your patch for review to kernel-team at lists.ubuntu.com and 
> >> I'll get some eyeballs on it.
> >>
> >> rtg
> >>
> >> Pete Graner wrote:
> >>> Felix,
> >>>
> >>> Sorry I have missed this. I have been traveling in Asia & Andy has been 
> >>> on holiday (and still is for the remainder of the week).
> >>>
> >>> I'm bouncing this to my team lead Tim Gardner (cc'd). Tim should be able 
> >>> to advise you.
> >>>
> >>> I will say that if upstream won't accept then it will be a hard sell for 
> >>> Tim. Carrying out of band patches gets quickly expensive.
> >>>
> >>> I have not been following the discussion so I'm not sure what the reason 
> >>> is but will you end up getting in included and if so whats the time 
> >>> frame, that will sway Tim's thinking quite a bit.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks
> >>>
> >>> ~pete
> >>>
> >>> Felix Kuehling wrote:
> >>>> Any update on this?
> >>>>
> >>>> Our deadline for putting in our side of the change is tomorrow night
> >>>> eastern time.
> >>>>
> >>>> Regards,
> >>>>    Felix
> >>>>
> >>>> On Wed, 2009-08-26 at 17:57 -0400, Felix Kuehling wrote:
> >>>>> Hi Andy and Pete,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> We're having trouble getting the patch accepted upstream, not because
> >>>>> it's technically wrong, but rather for ideological reasons. Would
> >>>>> Canonical be willing to include the patch in Ubuntu 9.10 regardless of
> >>>>> whether (or when) it's accepted upstream?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Without this patch the early-look driver that will be included in Ubuntu
> >>>>> 9.10 will be unable to respond to AC/DC events. This may have
> >>>>> detrimental effects on the power consumption on mobile devices.
> >>>>> Depending on the power consumption and battery power, this may even
> >>>>> result in hardware damage.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> We need to submit (or not submit) our corresponding driver change for
> >>>>> the driver release to Canonical by Tuesday next week. By then I need to
> >>>>> know whether Ubuntu 9.10 is going to ship with the patch or not.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Best regards,
> >>>>>   Felix
> >>>>>
> >>>>> P.S.: I attached the patch again, for reference.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Tue, 2009-07-14 at 13:30 -0400, Pete Graner wrote:
> >>>>>> Felix Kuehling wrote:
> >>>>>>> Adding Matthew.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> We have a patch that we intend to propose for adoption upstream
> >>>>>>> (attached). This would enable us to continue receiving 
> >>>>>>> notifications in
> >>>>>>> our kernel driver, whenever AC power is plugged or unplugged.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Pete, Andrew, what's your feeling about this patch? Can you see any
> >>>>>>> issues including this in Ubuntu 9.10? Do you foresee any trouble 
> >>>>>>> getting
> >>>>>>> this accepted upstream?
> >>>>>> Felix,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I'll let Andy comment on this.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Andy can you take a look pls.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Thanks
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> ~pete
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Thu, 2009-07-02 at 16:24 -0400, Pete Graner wrote:
> >>>>>>>> Hi Bryce,
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Andy is on Holiday until next week, so I'll try and answer what I 
> >>>>>>>> can...
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> See responses inline...
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On Thu, Jul 02, 2009 at 12:40:12PM -0700, Bryce Harrington wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> Hi Pete and Andy,
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> There were a few kernel questions that came up at today's 
> >>>>>>>>> AMD/Canonical
> >>>>>>>>> call from Felix, who is one of AMD's fglrx development engineers 
> >>>>>>>>> looking
> >>>>>>>>> at getting the driver working well on Ubuntu.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> 1.  In testing recent Karmic, Felix noticed that we have the 
> >>>>>>>>> intel drm
> >>>>>>>>>     driver always being loaded now for KMS, and is wondering if 
> >>>>>>>>> this is
> >>>>>>>>>     going to be done in all cases going forward, or if logic will be
> >>>>>>>>>     included in the kernel to only load it if on Intel graphics?
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>     (And a special case to consider - if user has on-board Intel
> >>>>>>>>>     graphics but an ATI add-in card present.)
> >>>>>>>> Not sure on this, Andy will be able to follow up.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> 2.  Related question is with proprietary drivers generally, if 
> >>>>>>>>> KMS is
> >>>>>>>>>     not supported by that driver, what mechanism will be used to 
> >>>>>>>>> prevent
> >>>>>>>>>     the FOSS drm driver being loaded.  There are brute force methods
> >>>>>>>>>     such as passing a kernel param via grub's menu.lst or even just
> >>>>>>>>>     removing the radeon module and rebuilding initrd on fglrx 
> >>>>>>>>> install,
> >>>>>>>>>     but we're wondering if we could do a more elegant method, 
> >>>>>>>>> such as an
> >>>>>>>>>     initrd parameter, or other toggle that could be flipped 
> >>>>>>>>> during fglrx
> >>>>>>>>>     install to let the kernel know to turn off KMS.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> I think the later is the approach is what was decided, Andy can
> >>>>>>>> confirm.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> 3.  An ACPI question - they've noticed some data structures have 
> >>>>>>>>> been
> >>>>>>>>>     moved from public headers to private locations.  This causes 
> >>>>>>>>> a bit
> >>>>>>>>>     of a problem for -fglrx to support certain hotkeys.  AMD has 
> >>>>>>>>> a patch
> >>>>>>>>>     they're going to be sending upstream to handle this, but it 
> >>>>>>>>> probably
> >>>>>>>>>     won't make it in time for .31.  Is there someone on the 
> >>>>>>>>> kernel team
> >>>>>>>>>     they could work with to review and/or include the patch for 
> >>>>>>>>> karmic,
> >>>>>>>>>     and to otherwise discuss the plan of attack with?
> >>>>>>>> Andy can do the review and yes we can carry the patch.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Finally, since a number of kernel questions have been coming up, 
> >>>>>>>>> we'd
> >>>>>>>>> like to invite one Canonical kernel person to the next AMD call 
> >>>>>>>>> in two
> >>>>>>>>> weeks.  Can you recommend whom should be invited to this call?
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Andy is your man :-) Send over the invite info and he can attend. Add
> >>>>>>>> me on it as well so I have the info in case we ever need to send
> >>>>>>>> someone else.
> >>>
> >>
> 
> 
-- 
 _____    Felix Kuehling
 \ _  |   Sr. Software Development Engineer, Build Manager
 /|_| |   Linux Product Engineering
|__/ \|   T 905 882 2600 x 8928

amd.com
felix.kuehling at amd.com