Hi,
On 11-06-15 03:43, Aaron Lu wrote:
On Tue, Jun 09, 2015 at 11:54:45PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote:
Hi,
On 06/09/2015 11:10 AM, Aaron Lu wrote:
On Tue, Jun 09, 2015 at 10:32:25AM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote:
On some systems acpi-video backlight is broken in the sense that it cannot
control the brightness of the backlight, but it must still be called on
resume to power-up the backlight after resume.
All the video module does on resume is a backlight set operation, it
can't control backlight but can turn on the screen on resume? Hmm...
I'll ask Sylvain to attach acpidump, let's see if there is anything
special there.
Ok, lets see what comes out of that. Note in the mean time Sylvain has
attached his acpidump.
Thanks.
According to the discussion in the bugzilla place, it doesn't seem we
have any other way to handle this at the moment.
Acked-by: Aaron Lu <aaron.lu@xxxxxxxxx>
Thanks. So that only leaves Jani's remark:
> Nitpick, I'd prefer positively named variables, like enable_foo to avoid
> the double negative !disable_foo. enable_foo and !enable_foo read much
> better. But up to Aaron and friends.
I personally believe that having the option named disable_backlight_sysfs_if
is better here since I believe that things which are always enabled except
on a few broken model laptops the option name should be disable_foo so
that people can clearly see in /proc/cmdline / dmesg that the user is passing
an option to disable something which is normally enabled.
As for the (!disabled) argument, the code in question here actually is:
if (disabled)
return 0;
:)
Still if people want me to change the option to a default-on
enable_backlight_sysfs_if option I can do a v3...
Regards,
Hans
--
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
