Quoting Ville Syrjälä (2018-10-24 17:33:17) > On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 05:02:18PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > > Quoting Ville Syrjala (2018-10-24 16:52:08) > > > From: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > Use intel_panel_actually_set_backlight() instead of a direct > > > call to pwm_config() in pwm_disable_backlight(). > > > > > > The main benefit is consistent debug logging when we turn off the > > > backlight. Currently we see nothing in dmesg which made me wonder > > > whether the backlight was even getting turned off properly. > > > > > > The second benefit is consistency; This is what we do for all > > > the other backlight implementations. > > > > It will also have the effect of calling > > intel_panel_compute_brightness(0) which one presumes is desired? > > We do it for everything else so it must be good? > > > > > Just worrying if the inverted brightness quirk is ever used with pwm. > > If we have to invert for normal operation I don't know why > we wouldn't want to invert when shutting down the backlight. Neither do I, just seems weird to set pwm to full to turn it off. Whatever, the disparity is silly, Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> -Chris _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
