Re: [Announce] kernel-power stable v50 in Extras
 

pali or others
Are there any important changes in kp-settings0.15 (e.g. freq 720)?
Or is it safe to keep 0.14 and boot kp51 with u-boot?

Re: [Announce] kernel-power stable v50 in Extras
 

reinob, just to make Your "filtering out" of possible cases easier - I'm absolutely sure, that device charged properly with 950 mAh (when battery almost empty), both by using and charge21.sh (the latter was around 900 mAh max, but I tested it after BME, and 50 mA difference is neglible/could be random), before sending. It's one of tests I *always* do on newly acquired N900's, as current limited without any reason is first sign of bad connection between USB port and motherboard.
---

Keep that good work, guys! I'm absolutely amazed on both freemangordon's/Pali's work for replacing BME, and reinob's work on stripping Maemo from bloat :)

/Estel

Re: [Announce] kernel-power stable v50 in Extras
 

yes it is safe. 0.15 version now can load old kernel config file and has fixed dependencies (work with kernel-cssu) too. no other changes was made.

Re: [Announce] kernel-power stable v50 in Extras
 

Hi, some finding...

Package 'linux-backports-modules-power' is still depending on 'kernel-power-modules' of power50 while of course the power51 version is installed. so it hinders the install of updates to all programs using the apt-* method. Do we actually still need that backports package with power51? Or can we safely remove it?

I'm also running kp-settings0.15, works like a charm.

Thanks.

Re: [Announce] kernel-power stable v50 in Extras
 

Here is an example of a dependency I encountered (with Cleven): http://talk.maemo.org/showpost.php?p...&postcount=680 So looking at it that way it is still needed. I deinstalled linux-backports-modules-power (including Cleven for now).

Re: [Announce] kernel-power stable v50 in Extras
 

you can safely remove it. linux-backports package contains kernel modules for version kp 50.

Re: [Announce] kernel-power stable v50 in Extras
 

No time to explain it all. But I've got my N900 in a very messy state in which shutdown (from MCE) results in DSME not knowing if charger is on or off and therefore rebooting into ACT_DEAD mode.

ACT_DEAD immediately resulted in another reboot because of missing osso-systemui-actingdead.

Now I've put the .so file in /usr/lib/systemui so ACT_DEAD more or less works, but systemui gets killed* (SISSEGV) 10 times in a row, so DSME reboots (this time OK), but bootreason is always software reset.

* could be because of missing hald-addon-bme, but I really don't want to reinstall it.

All this without ever needing to reflash, mind you :)
(and no R&D either. Just /etc/no_lg_reboots).

I'm going to get rid of ACT_DEAD for good. I'll probably replace it with some nice fb console (so you want recovery shell? just plug cable, the extra in-kernel charging comes at no cost :)

I will also remove DSME completely from the N900. This will require careful planning, but I bet I can manage to pull that off without a single reflash :)

After DSME, the next in my hit list if HAL hisself, and OHM, and whatnot :)

Stay tuned..

Re: [Announce] kernel-power stable v50 in Extras
 

There's no 0.15 package available. Only the build went through ok...

Re: [Announce] kernel-power stable v50 in Extras
 

Installed
No issue till now.
Thanks for your efforts.

Can you please create new thread?

Re: [Announce] kernel-power stable v50 in Extras
 

Excuse me for (again) hijacking the thread :)

The problem is apparently that DSME gets confused when shutting down if bq27x00_battery module[*] is loaded. If you unload it before shutdown the N900 turns really off.
[*] I loaded it to be able to see the battery level (as voltage) because I removed the (now useless) standard battery indicator. I have now replaced the hal-device | grep ... command I use in DCE with a script using i2cget, so I don't need bq27x00 anymore.

*** EDIT EDIT EDIT ***
Apparently removing bq27x00 is not enough to make DSME know whether the charger is connected or not.

After browsing through DSME source code I noticed that the initial state is UNKNOWN. Probably BME tells DSME later if it's connected or not. Without BME, somebody else has to tell DSME to chill off.

There comes BATTTEST to the rescue! It's part of DSME, and just by executing:

# batttest --charger 0

DSME is now informed that no charger is connected. Poweroff works as expected! :)
[ should you consider it necessary, you can imagine me dancing :) ]
****************************

DSME and HAL will have to wait. OHM is gone and everything seems fine. I will put a SIM card and try to call/receive calls as well as play some music with and without headphones to see if not having OHM has messed up something I haven't noticed.

Once I collect all my hacks I will make a new thread.