On Sat, Jan 22, 2005 at 08:37:59PM +0100, Juergen Kreileder wrote: > > > As you see, the crux of this patch is to check for the existence of > > a via-pmu device in the firmware provided device-tree. > > This isn't really good enough. My machine (G5) has a PMU, it's in the
Ah, yes. Is it a via-pmu ? I don't think so, and so accordying to current kernel sources, there is no /dev/pmu created, which is the exclusive domain of via-pmu.c. Can you provide me with your /proc/device-tree/aliases content please ? > device-tree and /proc/pmu exists too. But it does not have > /dev/pmu[1]. You only get /dev/pmu the kernel was built with > CONFIG_PMAC_PBOOK (last time I checked ppc64 didn't compile with that > option). Exactly. > Even if you patch the kernel to get /dev/pmu on all machines with a > via-pmu (I've written a patch for this some time ago), it wouldn't > help because not all machines have an fblevel control. So, at least we weed out all machines which have no chance of having a /dev/pmu. Do you know how we can check for machines which have a fblevel control ? > Anyhow, I won't complain as long as errors are just logged to > .xsession-errors instead of being reported via annoying dialogs. Hehe. Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
