On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 1:47 PM, Matthew Garrett <mjg59@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 01:07:57PM -0500, Felipe Contreras wrote: >> If we can make the software behave consistently for 99% of the >> machines out there instead of only 90%, that's better. > > If we can't make an interface 100% consistent, we shouldn't pretend that > the interface is 100% consistent. We can't, and so we don't. Setting a > backlight value of 0 may turn the screen off, and userspace needs to > deal with that. This is insanity; we can never guarantee 100% of anything. Better is better. And 99% is better than 90% % git grep quirks | wc -l 1585 Moreover, Linux already does quirks, and when there are quirks it means there's no 100% guarantee of the thing working as it should; hence the need for quirks, which is never complete, never 100%. Anyway, screw the users, right? All you care about is that the code looks good to you. If we care about the users, we would provide a consistent interface, where 0 means the same thing on all the backlight drivers. If all we can do is provide this consistency 99% of the time through quirks, that is the way to go. -- Felipe Contreras -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
