From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Hans de Goede Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] acpi-video: Add a parameter to not register the backlight sysfs interface Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2015 14:13:55 +0200 Message-ID: <55797B83.7010903@redhat.com> References: <1433838745-8857-1-git-send-email-hdegoede@redhat.com> <20150609091042.GA1280@aaronlu.sh.intel.com> <557760A5.9000404@redhat.com> <20150611014315.GA26277@aaronlu.sh.intel.com> <55795F3B.4040506@redhat.com> <87mw065wls.fsf@intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:42695 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754329AbbFKMN7 (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 Jun 2015 08:13:59 -0400 In-Reply-To: <87mw065wls.fsf@intel.com> Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org To: Jani Nikula , Aaron Lu Cc: Sylvain Pasche , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, Ben Skeggs Hi, On 11-06-15 13:10, Jani Nikula wrote: > On Thu, 11 Jun 2015, Hans de Goede wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On 11-06-15 03:43, Aaron Lu wrote: >>> On Tue, Jun 09, 2015 at 11:54:45PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> On 06/09/2015 11:10 AM, Aaron Lu wrote: >>>>> On Tue, Jun 09, 2015 at 10:32:25AM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: >>>>>> On some systems acpi-video backlight is broken in the sense that it cannot >>>>>> control the brightness of the backlight, but it must still be called on >>>>>> resume to power-up the backlight after resume. >>>>> >>>>> All the video module does on resume is a backlight set operation, it >>>>> can't control backlight but can turn on the screen on resume? Hmm... >>>>> >>>>> I'll ask Sylvain to attach acpidump, let's see if there is anything >>>>> special there. >>>> >>>> Ok, lets see what comes out of that. Note in the mean time Sylvain has >>>> attached his acpidump. >>> >>> Thanks. >>> According to the discussion in the bugzilla place, it doesn't seem we >>> have any other way to handle this at the moment. >>> >>> Acked-by: Aaron Lu >> >> Thanks. So that only leaves Jani's remark: >> >> > Nitpick, I'd prefer positively named variables, like enable_foo to avoid >> > the double negative !disable_foo. enable_foo and !enable_foo read much >> > better. But up to Aaron and friends. >> >> I personally believe that having the option named disable_backlight_sysfs_if >> is better here since I believe that things which are always enabled except >> on a few broken model laptops the option name should be disable_foo so >> that people can clearly see in /proc/cmdline / dmesg that the user is passing >> an option to disable something which is normally enabled. > > Fair enough. > >> >> As for the (!disabled) argument, the code in question here actually is: >> >> if (disabled) >> return 0; >> >> :) >> >> Still if people want me to change the option to a default-on >> enable_backlight_sysfs_if option I can do a v3... > > I'm not insisting. Great, thanks :) So I'm going to assume this v2 patch is ready for merging then, if anyone wants me to make any changes please let me know. Regards, Hans