From: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
To: Anders Kaseorg <andersk@MIT.EDU>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>,
Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>,
Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@linux.intel.com>
Cc: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: PROBLEM: Native backlight regressed from logarithmic to linear scale
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2014 11:46:13 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <53D76D65.6030704@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1407212333200.44274@all-night-tool.MIT.EDU>
Hi,
On 07/22/2014 06:32 AM, Anders Kaseorg wrote:
> [1.] One line summary of the problem:
>
> Native backlight regressed from logarithmic to linear scale
>
> [2.] Full description of the problem/report:
>
> With the new default of video.use_native_backlight=0 (commit
> v3.16-rc1~30^2~2^3), my Thinkpad T510 backlight has become very difficult
> to control near the low end of the scale. The lowest setting now turns
> the backlight completely off, but the second-lowest setting is too bright.
> Meanwhile, the difference between the highest several settings is nearly
> imperceptible.
>
> This happened because /sys/class/backlight/acpi_video0/brightness (which
> has now disappeared) used a different scale than
> /sys/class/intel_backlight/brightness; the relationship between
> acpi_video0 and intel_backlight was not linear. I measured the exact
> relationship as follows:
>
> acpi intel
> 0 52
> 1 87
> 2 139
> 3 174
> 4 226
> 5 261
> 6 313
> 7 435
> 8 591
> 9 800
> 10 1078
> 11 1461
> 12 1914
> 13 2557
> 14 3358
> 15 4437
>
> The relationship is close to logarithmic; a good fit is intel =
> 60*(4/3)^acpi, or acpi = log_{4/3} (intel/60). It’s well known that
> perceived brightness varies logarithmically with physical luminance
> (Fechner’s law), so it’s no surprise that the acpi_video0 scale was more
> useful.
>
> Since the kernel no longer uses ACPI to do this translation, it should do
> the translation itself.
I've been thinking a bit about this, and I believe that the right answer
here is to do the linear to logarithmic mapping in user-space. The intel
backlight interface has a type of raw, clearly signalling to userspace that
it is a raw "untranslated" interface, as such any fanciness such as
creating a logarithmic scale should be done in userspace IMHO.
Regards,
Hans
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-07-29 9:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-07-22 4:32 PROBLEM: Native backlight regressed from logarithmic to linear scale Anders Kaseorg
2014-07-22 12:24 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-07-29 9:46 ` Hans de Goede [this message]
2014-07-29 10:14 ` [Intel-gfx] " Anders Kaseorg
2014-07-29 10:38 ` Daniel Vetter
2014-08-08 9:38 ` Jani Nikula
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=53D76D65.6030704@redhat.com \
--to=hdegoede@redhat.com \
--cc=andersk@MIT.EDU \
--cc=daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch \
--cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=jani.nikula@linux.intel.com \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).