From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Seth Forshee Subject: Re: [PATCH] backlight: add support for disabling backlights via sysfs Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2012 16:16:00 -0500 Message-ID: <20120628211600.GB29456@thinkpad-t410> References: <1340910426-13269-1-git-send-email-seth.forshee@canonical.com> <20120628191043.GA9777@srcf.ucam.org> <20120628193017.GA29456@thinkpad-t410> <20120628193652.GB10945@srcf.ucam.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from youngberry.canonical.com ([91.189.89.112]:35362 "EHLO youngberry.canonical.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751293Ab2F1VQG (ORCPT ); Thu, 28 Jun 2012 17:16:06 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120628193652.GB10945@srcf.ucam.org> Sender: platform-driver-x86-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Matthew Garrett Cc: Richard Purdie , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org, Corentin Chary On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 08:36:52PM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote: > Userspace should already be prioritising platform interfaces over raw > interfaces, so if gmux works on the Mac then there's no problem. DMI > lists should, broadly speaking, be unnecessary - they're mostly a > symptom of us not understanding how the hardware is expected to work. I agree that we want to avoid papering over problems instead of fixing them, but we're already disabling the ACPI backlight in some cases and will continue to do so for the time being. We're also doing it with apple_bl. It's not a question of whether we do it, but how. What I still don't understand is your reason for preferring driver-specific interfaces for disabling backlights to a single generic interface. Are you afraid that allowing it to be done from userspace will make it too easy, and as a result quirks will be applied without attempting to fix the problem (i.e. the quriking should go through a kernel dev to ensure someone tries to fix the problem is made before applying a quirk)?