linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] platform: fix samsung brightness min/max calculations

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 11 May 2011 14:47:49 +1000
From:	Jason Stubbs <jasonbstubbs@...il.com>
To:	Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
Cc:	Greg KH <gregkh@...e.de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] platform: fix samsung brightness min/max calculations

On Wed, 11 May 2011 08:39:08 Greg KH wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 06:55:50PM +1000, Jason Stubbs wrote:
> > Not sure of the "bump" process, so I'll just go over each part of the
> > patch.
> > 
> > Note that all the changes only affect the sabi_config where
> > min_brightness is 1 so you might not see in difference on your hardware.
> 
> This isn't needed anymore due to your other patch superseeding it,
> right?

Actually, this one is irrelevant to the nc210/nc110 support as that laptop 
uses the "SwSmi@" sabi. It was just something I noticed while learning the 
code. The miscalculations will only affect any laptops that use the "SECLINUX" 
sabi but I tested it by setting min_brightness to 2 for my laptop.

The patch doesn't apply cleanly on top of the nc210/nc110 patch though as they 
both modify set_brightness(). It might apply with a higher fuzz factor as the 
changes don't actually clash. Should I redo the patch?

Regards,
Jason Stubbs
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/