[ltp] Re: Generic battery interface

[Greg KH]

On Thu, Jul 27, 2006 at 03:44:52PM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 27, 2006 at 05:39:06PM +0300, Shem Multinymous wrote:
> 
> > Can we really assume there's one driver providing all battery-related
> > attributes?
> 
> Hmm. That's a good point.
> 
> > So, if we insist on a standard battery device class name, how do we
> > cope with multiple sources of information and control functions?
> 
> Ignoring the multiple sources of information bit for the moment, we need 
> to figure out the correct method of event notification anyway. There's a 
> long-term plan to get rid of /proc/acpi, so acpi notifications need to 
> be more more generic in any case.

You can poll sysfs files to be notified when states change...

thanks,

greg k-h