From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Renninger Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] asus-laptop Date: Mon, 07 May 2007 12:00:01 +0200 Message-ID: <1178532004.1231.982.camel@queen.suse.de> References: <200705061445.03504.corentincj@iksaif.net> Reply-To: trenn@suse.de Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from ns2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:49745 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754274AbXEGKAF (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 May 2007 06:00:05 -0400 In-Reply-To: <200705061445.03504.corentincj@iksaif.net> Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org To: corentincj@iksaif.net Cc: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, Danny Kukawka On Sun, 2007-05-06 at 14:45 +0200, Corentin CHARY wrote: > Hi Len, > Some asus-laptop patchs for 2.6.22 =). I recently had a look at an ASUS and wanted to try out the video module. The laptop had the ACPI specific general brightness and other video AML functions. But also the ATKxy Asus specific device that asus_acpi makes use of. In AML code one could see, that the use of those was exclusive, a variable (or method?) was used to either return out immediately from ATKxy or general ACPI funcs (the ones from ACPI spec. Appendix B). On a quick try asus_acpi worked, video did not. It looks as if asus begins to move to the spec? Some problems might come up: - Interference between asus_acpi and video - Which model works better with what kind of method (there might come a break point, (possibly Vista?), when the ACPI spec functions work better than ATKxy the asus specific device vanishes totally at some point). While I like the idea that vendors move on to the standard, I fear some more very machine specific problems might hit us in future... Just some info, if anyone finds out more, I'd be interested in any related info... Thanks, Thomas