Re: [RFC 0/2] ACPI: video: prefer native over vendor

Rafael J. Wysocki
2022-11-09T13:51:29Z

On Sat, Nov 5, 2022 at 4:17 PM Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On 11/5/22 15:52, Hans de Goede wrote:
> > Hi Rafael, Matthew,
> >
> > Here is a second attempt at always registering only a single
> > /sys/class/backlight device per panel.
> >
> > This first round of testing has shown that native works well even on
> > systems so old that the don't have acpi_video backlight control support.
> >
> > This patch series makes native be preferred over vendor, which should
> > avoid the problems seen with the 6.1 changes before the fixes.
> >
> > ATM there is one known model where this will cause a regression,
> > the Sony Vaio PCG-FRV3 from 2003. I plan to add a DMI quirk for that
> > in the next version of this series, but I'm waiting for some more
> > testing (to check that the vendor interface does actually work) first.
> >
> > I will also do another blogpost, focussing on asking users to see
> > if they have a laptop which provides a combination of vendor + native
> > backlight interfaces, which may be impacted by this series. This is
> > the main reason why this is a RFC for now.
>
> The blogpost requesting testing of laptops with a combination
> of vendor + native backlight interfaces can be found here:
>
> https://hansdegoede.dreamwidth.org/27024.html

The patches in this series look reasonable to me, even though I'm not
sure if the assumption that the Windows 8 hardware certification
requirements were always followed is not overly optimistic.