Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 9:24 AM, Linus Torvalds > <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> Bjørn, what's your setup? Is this perhaps solvable some other way? Just to answer that: I don't use any particular desktop environment. I have acpid running to take care of the most basic power management stuff. My X session is simply WindowMaker (sic) running directly from lightdm. No session management or fancy policy daemons. So I don't have any daemon which would react on the brightness key codes. Now, it's not that I would mind adding a daemon to handle stuff like brightness control. I reported this as a bug because I was a bit surprised by the existing behaviour breaking like that, and I thought that other users might be as surprised as me. Some maybe even without the ability to track down the change and the setting that would restore the old behaviour. > For example, I wonder if we could fix the "dual brightness change" > problem automatically by making a new option for > 'brightness_switch_enabled'. > > Currently, there are two cases: > > - enabled: do the actual brightness change _and_ send the input > report keycode for a brightness change > > - disabled: just send the keycode, excpecting the desktop software to > handle it. > > and maybe we could have a new case (and make *that* the default): > > - delayed: send the keycode, and set up a delayed timer (say, one > tenth of a second) to do the actual brightness change. And if a > brightness change from user mode comes in during that delay, we cancel > the kernel-induced pending change. That sounds like a good solution to me FWIW. Bjørn -- 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
