From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755775Ab1BIXDT (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Feb 2011 18:03:19 -0500 Received: from kroah.org ([198.145.64.141]:35021 "EHLO coco.kroah.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755337Ab1BIXDS (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Feb 2011 18:03:18 -0500 Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2011 15:02:59 -0800 From: Greg KH To: Matthew Garrett Cc: Randy Dunlap , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Platform: add Samsung Laptop platform driver Message-ID: <20110209230259.GA475@kroah.com> References: <20110209224006.GA11202@kroah.com> <20110209225056.GA25009@srcf.ucam.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20110209225056.GA25009@srcf.ucam.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Feb 09, 2011 at 10:50:56PM +0000, Matthew Garrett wrote: > \o/ > > A quick glance suggests that the firmware interface is an abomination > and really there's no reason for them not to have used an existing > interface of some sort, but that's par for the course. I'll review it > properly now. The firmware interface pre-dates ACPI. Samsung seems to have only started using ACPI for their newest models, as it's a requirement for Win7 certification. But even there, they still rely on their SABI interface for the majority of the "odd" hardware control knobs, including the backlight control, which baffles me even to this day. thanks, greg k-h