From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andrey Borzenkov Subject: Re: [PATCH] toshiba_acpi: fingers off backlight if video.ko is serving this functionality Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2008 20:17:52 +0300 Message-ID: <200811152017.56926.arvidjaar@mail.ru> References: <200811081637.45099.arvidjaar@mail.ru> <200811152005.05031.arvidjaar@mail.ru> <20081115171110.GA9332@srcf.ucam.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart43818431.34Hm8aq9LJ"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mx5.mail.ru ([194.67.23.25]:3976 "EHLO mx5.mail.ru" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755639AbYKORSC (ORCPT ); Sat, 15 Nov 2008 12:18:02 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20081115171110.GA9332@srcf.ucam.org> Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org To: Matthew Garrett Cc: Thomas Renninger , Len Brown , linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org --nextPart43818431.34Hm8aq9LJ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline On Saturday 15 November 2008, Matthew Garrett wrote: > On Sat, Nov 15, 2008 at 08:05:04PM +0300, Andrey Borzenkov wrote: > > On Saturday 15 November 2008, Matthew Garrett wrote: > > > Right. But that doesn't mean they're competing, as such. If you set t= he=20 > > > brightness via toshiba_acpi > >=20 > > I probably have problems with expressing myself as non-native English > > speaker. > >=20 > > I am not interested in setting values via echoing into sysfs file. I > > am interested in my desktop brightness control working out of the box. > > And desktop driver control has no way to select, which of two sysfs > > files to use. Nor do I understand why I have to create this problem > > of selecting right driver when I already have possibility to avoid it. > >=20 > > If you think exposing both knobs is non-issue, why are all those patches > > for other vendor drivers included in the kernel in the first place? >=20 > Because in some of those cases, the ACPI and vendor function are=20 > implemented in different ways that can then get out of sync with each=20 > other. As a result, you can get garbage information. If the values in=20 > your two backlight interfaces are always sane, then there's no inherent=20 > need to hide one of them. THE VALUE IN MY TWO BACKLIGHT INTERFACES ARE NOT THE SAME. I said this many times already. What exactly is not clear in this sentence? > The kernel exposes the available functionality =20 > and userland then determines the policy used to choose one over the=20 > other. >=20 --nextPart43818431.34Hm8aq9LJ Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEABECAAYFAkkfBEAACgkQR6LMutpd94yiHgCeOK26ghZLB4f3OOmXLkXTNCcw +VMAni4HJdCQp2baFfWHvKHxHLSOg7tV =Esl/ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart43818431.34Hm8aq9LJ--