apm(4)?
Hauke Fath <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.os.netbsd.ports.i386 |
|---|---|
| Organization | Lacking |
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
All, while pulling a trustworthy Thinkpad 380D from 5.1 to 8beta, I noticed that apm(4) was gone. A MONOLITHIC kernel says NetBSD 8.0_BETA (MONOLITHIC) #0: Sun Nov 12 03:57:43 CET 2017 [...] mainbus0 (root) ACPI BIOS Error (bug): A valid RSDP was not found (20170303/tbxfroot-261) acpi_probe: failed to initialize tables ACPI Error: Could not remove SCI handler (20170303/evmisc-312) cpu0 at mainbus0 cpu0: Intel 586-class, 152MHz, id 0x52c [...] and does not attach apm0 to acpi0, as GENERIC promises, probably because acpi(4) itself did not attach. Looking closer, there is still #apm0 at mainbus0 # Advanced power management # Tuning for power management, see apm(4) for more details. #options APM_V10_ONLY # Use only the APM 1.0 calls #options APM_NO_POWEROFF # Don't power off on halt(8) #options APM_POWER_PRINT # Print stats on the console #options APM_DISABLE_INTERRUPTS=0 # Don't disable interrupts contrary to what the commit log <http://cvsweb.netbsd.org/bsdweb.cgi/src/sys/arch/i386/i386/mainbus.c?rev=1.95&content-type=text/x-cvsweb-markup&only_with_tag=MAIN> says. Unfortunately, enabling it leads to a "apm cannot attach to mainbus" config(8) error as reported here: <https://mail-index.netbsd.org/tech-misc/2016/05/16/msg000307.html> Note that according to a prominent NetBSD documentation page, apm(8) is very much alive: <http://www.netbsd.org/docs/power-mgmt/> So, I've come to the understanding that apm(4) is only available on top of acpi(4), which does not attach on machines that predate ACPI. Those machines are then left without power management, or stuck with old NetBSD releases. What did I miss? Cheerio, hauke -- Hauke Fath <[email protected]> Ernst-Ludwig-Straße 15 64625 Bensheim Germany