From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] acpi: allow for an override to set _REV Date: Fri, 22 May 2015 03:02:56 +0200 Message-ID: <2151643.NYQBfFsFjv@vostro.rjw.lan> References: <20150517174144.GA17503@light.dominikbrodowski.net> <6154326.X9FC8ZVDIy@vostro.rjw.lan> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Return-path: Received: from v094114.home.net.pl ([79.96.170.134]:63848 "HELO v094114.home.net.pl" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1753988AbbEVAhe (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 May 2015 20:37:34 -0400 In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org To: Matthew Garrett Cc: Dominik Brodowski , linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, Mario Limonciello , Mark Brown , alsa-devel@alsa-project.org On Thursday, May 21, 2015 11:10:20 AM Matthew Garrett wrote: > On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 6:24 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > Which doesn't explain why we need a config option per quirk. To me, such config > > options don't add any value, because (a) everyone will set them anyway and (b) > > removing the quirks from the source is trivial if needed. > > We'd disable this quirk in Fedora the moment jack detection works, > because we've got the userspace to handle it and using I2S is > preferable to using HDA - but in doing so we might break battery > detection on the other Dell that's playing _REV tricks. This seems > like a suboptimal choice to have to make. What about removing the quirk from the table in that case? Do we really need a special config option around it? -- I speak only for myself. Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.