From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Matthew Garrett Subject: Re: [PATCH] Rationalise ACPI backlight implementation Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 05:28:05 +0000 Message-ID: <20080128052804.GA26091@srcf.ucam.org> References: <20071226020325.GA21099@srcf.ucam.org> <200801241644.49114.lenb@kernel.org> <20080126220045.b93db7c9.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20080128012549.GA24166@srcf.ucam.org> <20080127211013.1ddaa6a1.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from cavan.codon.org.uk ([78.32.9.130]:56561 "EHLO vavatch.codon.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750835AbYA1F20 (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Jan 2008 00:28:26 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080127211013.1ddaa6a1.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org To: Andrew Morton Cc: Len Brown , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org On Sun, Jan 27, 2008 at 09:10:13PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > You cannot seriously tell me that if we are to change this range from 0-8 > up to 0-100 then this is not a backwards-incompatible change in > semantics. We're talking about changing 0-100 to 0-something sane, because the current driver is quite clearly broken. And yes, I'm perfectly happy to say that - the reason that max_brightness is exported is to allow userspace to determine what range of values is acceptable, and if userspace ignores that then things are going to break for it at some point. -- Matthew Garrett | mjg59@srcf.ucam.org