From: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@linux.intel.com>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>
Cc: Matthew Garrett <matthew.garrett@nebula.com>,
Seth Forshee <seth.forshee@canonical.com>,
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@hmh.eng.br>,
Aaron Lu <aaron.lu@intel.com>,
Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>,
"intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org"
<intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>,
Yves-Alexis Perez <corsac@debian.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org"
<dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>,
ACPI Devel Mailing List <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>,
"Lee, Chun-Yi" <joeyli.kernel@gmail.com>,
Igor Gnatenko <i.gnatenko.brain@gmail.com>,
Lee Chun-Yi <jlee@novell.com>, Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] ACPI / video / i915: Remove ACPI backlight if firmware expects Windows 8
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2013 11:45:19 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87hadrycf4.fsf@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130911013206.GA556@mint-spring.sh.intel.com>
On Wed, 11 Sep 2013, Aaron Lu <aaron.lu@intel.com> wrote:
> It is possible the i915 driver decides not to register a backlight
> interface for the graphics card for some reason(memory allocation failed
> or it knows the native control does not work on this card or whatever),
> so I would prefer let i915 tell ACPI video that it has registered a
> native backlight control interface as Jani has said.
>
> Then together with the video.use_native_backlight, we can register or
> not register ACPI video backlight interface accordingly. Or rather, we
> can simply not register ACPI video backlight interface for Win8 systems
> as long as i915 indicates that it has native backlight control(if the
> native control is broken, i915 should fix it or blacklist it so that
> i915 will not indicate it has native backlight control and ACPI video
> will continue to register its own).
>
> How does this sound?
Sounds good to me.
Before plunging forward, have you observed any difference between the
boot modes? We have reports [1] that the backlight behaviour is
different with UEFI vs. UEFI+CSM or legacy boot. So I'm wondering if the
acpi_gbl_osi_data >= ACPI_OSI_WIN_8 check in patch 2/2 is the whole
story.
Further, if we tell the BIOS we're Windows 8 to use the tested BIOS code
paths, what guarantees do we have of UEFI+CSM or legacy boots working?
BR,
Jani.
[1] https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=47941#c96
--
Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Technology Center
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-09-11 8:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-09-09 8:37 [PATCH 0/2] Rework ACPI video driver Aaron Lu
2013-09-09 8:40 ` [PATCH 1/2] ACPI / video: seperate backlight control and event interface Aaron Lu
2013-09-10 5:23 ` Igor Gnatenko
2013-09-09 8:42 ` [PATCH 2/2] ACPI / video / i915: Remove ACPI backlight if firmware expects Windows 8 Aaron Lu
2013-09-09 9:32 ` Daniel Vetter
2013-09-09 12:16 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-09-09 15:21 ` Daniel Vetter
2013-09-09 15:38 ` Matthew Garrett
2013-09-09 20:23 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-09-10 13:53 ` Jani Nikula
2013-09-10 13:56 ` Matthew Garrett
2013-09-10 14:21 ` Jani Nikula
2013-09-10 14:21 ` Matthew Garrett
2013-09-10 19:23 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-09-11 1:32 ` Aaron Lu
2013-09-11 8:45 ` Jani Nikula [this message]
2013-09-11 8:45 ` Matthew Garrett
2013-09-11 9:09 ` Yves-Alexis Perez
2013-09-11 10:29 ` Jani Nikula
2013-09-11 10:30 ` Matthew Garrett
2013-09-12 2:26 ` Aaron Lu
2013-09-10 6:30 ` Aaron Lu
2013-09-09 11:44 ` Igor Gnatenko
2013-09-10 3:27 ` Aaron Lu
2013-09-10 5:13 ` Igor Gnatenko
2013-09-10 5:16 ` Aaron Lu
2013-09-10 5:22 ` Igor Gnatenko
2013-09-10 5:42 ` Aaron Lu
2013-09-10 5:23 ` Igor Gnatenko
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=87hadrycf4.fsf@intel.com \
--to=jani.nikula@linux.intel.com \
--cc=aaron.lu@intel.com \
--cc=corsac@debian.org \
--cc=daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=hmh@hmh.eng.br \
--cc=i.gnatenko.brain@gmail.com \
--cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=jlee@novell.com \
--cc=joeyli.kernel@gmail.com \
--cc=lenb@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=matthew.garrett@nebula.com \
--cc=rjw@sisk.pl \
--cc=seth.forshee@canonical.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