Re: [PATCH] dell-laptop: add parameter to disable the backlight device.

[Alex Davis <alex14641@yahoo.com>]

I code, therefore I am

--------------------------------------------
On Sun, 12/8/13, Alex Davis <alex14641@yahoo.com> wrote:

 Subject: Re: [PATCH] dell-laptop: add parameter to disable the backlight device.
 To: "mjg59@srcf.ucam.org" <mjg59@srcf.ucam.org>, "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, "Levente Kurusa" <levex@linux.com>
 Date: Sunday, December 8, 2013, 3:38 PM
 
 
 
 --------------------------------------------
 On Sun, 12/8/13, Levente Kurusa <levex@linux.com>
 wrote:
 
 > Subject: Re: [PATCH] dell-laptop: add parameter to
 disable the backlight device.
 > To: "Alex Davis" <alex14641@yahoo.com>,
 "mjg59@srcf.ucam.org"
 <mjg59@srcf.ucam.org>,
 >"linux->kernel@vger.kernel.org"
 <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
 > Date: Sunday, December 8, 2013, 9:06 AM
  
  
  >>2013-12-08 14:40, Alex Davis:
  >> I have a Dell Inspiron N7010 Laptop with Intel
  graphics. When the dell-laptop module is loaded,
  >> two backlight device devices are created;
  dell_backlight, and intel_backlight from the Intel
  >> graphics driver. The dell_backlight device is
  non-functional, but the graphics subsystem uses
  >> it instead of the functioning intel_backlight
 device.
  The result is that, when running KDE,
  >> screen brightness cannot be controlled. I've added
 a
  module parameter, disable_backlight
  >> which, when true, will disable the dell_backlight
  device, and leave only the intel_backlight:
  >> with this, screen brightness can be controlled.
  >> 
  
 > Hi,
  
  >I think it would be better if we could figure out why
 the
  >dell_blacklight device is not working rather than
 disabling
  >it.
  
  
 > Regarding your patch, it creates a memory leak as you:
 >  * allocate a platform device
 >  * you add it
 >  * you allocated a page for SMI
 > 
 > Your if(disable_blacklight) code should go
 > where it checks the DMI.
 > 
 > -- Regards,
 > Levente Kurusa
 
 Levante,
 
 >You are correct. The existing code also has a memory leak. I
 >will submit a patch for that.
 
Upon further investigation, I'm not seeing the memory leak. I see the objects being allocated, but they are deallocated in the dell_exit method.