Hide Forgot
Description of problem: Since latest yum update yielding a kern upgrade to 3.2.1-3.fc16.x86_64 /proc/acpi/battery went missing Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): How reproducible: Very-- [root@py ~]# ls -ltr /proc/acpi/battery ls: cannot access /proc/acpi/battery: No such file or directory [root@py ~]# acpitool Battery is not present, bailing out. AC adapter : <info not available> Thermal info : <not available> [root@py ~]# dmidecode | grep bat -i -A 12 Portable Battery Location: Rear Manufacturer: SANYO Name: 42T4940 Design Capacity: 93240 mWh Design Voltage: 11100 mV SBDS Version: 03.01 Maximum Error: Unknown SBDS Serial Number: 3723 SBDS Manufacture Date: 2011-06-24 SBDS Chemistry: LION OEM-specific Information: 0x00000000 [root@py ~]# dstat -t -c --power --top-cpu --top-io --top-bio --power --battery-remain 10 Module dstat_power failed to load. ([Errno 2] No such file or directory: '/proc/acpi/battery/') Module dstat_power failed to load. ([Errno 2] No such file or directory: '/proc/acpi/battery/') Module dstat_battery_remain failed to load. ([Errno 2] No such file or directory: '/proc/acpi/battery/') Steps to Reproduce: 1. update via yum update to latest fc16 kernel 2. reboot on battery power only 3. seek acpitool or cat /proc/acpi/battery Actual results: See above Expected results: battery info, discharge, wattage in powertop Additional info:
This missing of /proc/acpi/battery also exists in kernel 3.2.2-1.fc16.x86_64.
also did latest yum upgrade to 3.2.2-1.fc16.x86_64 and yes bug still exists, and for some reason i went from 6 hours remaining on battery power to 3 hours. so quite a regression. i'm unsure about how to debug this without the acpi battery proc entry.... if you need anything i am in full cooperation
I also noticed that /proc/acpi/battery disappeared since Kernel 3.2.
same here, Kernel 3.2.7-1.fc16.x86_64, /proc/acpi/battery is missing, powertop does not show info about power consumption.
Same here: $ ls /proc/acpi/ button wakeup $ uname -a Linux gman 3.2.7-1.fc16.x86_64 #1 SMP Tue Feb 21 01:40:47 UTC 2012 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux Worked before upgrading the kernel from kernel-3.1.0-7.fc16.x86_64 which was installed by fresh fedora 16 install from usb-stick.
Same in F17.
Verified missing in F17. Apparently /proc/acpi/battery/ is deprecated. Most of the battery information is now available in /sys/class/power_supply/BAT0/ for the first battery, and so on. Though I don't see "present rate".
(In reply to comment #7) > Verified missing in F17. Apparently /proc/acpi/battery/ is deprecated. > Most of the battery information is now available in > /sys/class/power_supply/BAT0/ for the first battery, and so on. Though I > don't see "present rate". I could not find it neither. I used acpi -b -i in a script to extract the remaining time for loading or unloading which I calculated before with present rate and last full capacity. Is there a place where you can find the present rate? Or do I have to calculate it myself with the values given in acpi -b -i?
same here: # rpm -q kernel kernel-3.6.3-1.fc17.x86_64
This message is a reminder that Fedora 16 is nearing its end of life. Approximately 4 (four) weeks from now Fedora will stop maintaining and issuing updates for Fedora 16. It is Fedora's policy to close all bug reports from releases that are no longer maintained. At that time this bug will be closed as WONTFIX if it remains open with a Fedora 'version' of '16'. Package Maintainer: If you wish for this bug to remain open because you plan to fix it in a currently maintained version, simply change the 'version' to a later Fedora version prior to Fedora 16's end of life. Bug Reporter: Thank you for reporting this issue and we are sorry that we may not be able to fix it before Fedora 16 is end of life. If you would still like to see this bug fixed and are able to reproduce it against a later version of Fedora, you are encouraged to click on "Clone This Bug" and open it against that version of Fedora. Although we aim to fix as many bugs as possible during every release's lifetime, sometimes those efforts are overtaken by events. Often a more recent Fedora release includes newer upstream software that fixes bugs or makes them obsolete. The process we are following is described here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping
acpitool-0.5.1-4.fc17.x86_64 kernel-3.6.11-1.fc17.x86_64
This message is a reminder that Fedora 17 is nearing its end of life. Approximately 4 (four) weeks from now Fedora will stop maintaining and issuing updates for Fedora 17. It is Fedora's policy to close all bug reports from releases that are no longer maintained. At that time this bug will be closed as WONTFIX if it remains open with a Fedora 'version' of '17'. Package Maintainer: If you wish for this bug to remain open because you plan to fix it in a currently maintained version, simply change the 'version' to a later Fedora version prior to Fedora 17's end of life. Bug Reporter: Thank you for reporting this issue and we are sorry that we may not be able to fix it before Fedora 17 is end of life. If you would still like to see this bug fixed and are able to reproduce it against a later version of Fedora, you are encouraged change the 'version' to a later Fedora version prior to Fedora 17's end of life. Although we aim to fix as many bugs as possible during every release's lifetime, sometimes those efforts are overtaken by events. Often a more recent Fedora release includes newer upstream software that fixes bugs or makes them obsolete.
acpitool-0.5.1-5.fc18.x86_64 kernel-3.9.8-200.fc18.x86_64
I'm not a maintainer of this package but I have a comment on this bug. This bug is reported on the acpi package. The acpi package is not the same as acpitool package. acpi is a userspace application and should not be confused with the kernel provided /proc/acpi interface. As David said it is also deprecated in favor of /sys interface. Try installing acpi and see if the issue exists there. acpitool only reads from /proc/acpi, acpi reads from both /proc/acpi and /sys.
(In reply to Johan Swensson from comment #14) > I'm not a maintainer of this package but I have a comment on this bug. > I am now a co-maintainer of this package and will try to help in any way that I can.
Thanks, Johan. acpi works for me. But I'm not the original reporter, so I don't know if this should be closed.
Eric, please let me know if this is an issue with the acpi application, acpitool or kernel.