linux-kernel - Re: Git backlight subsystem tree

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:	Thu, 8 Feb 2007 18:32:02 +0000 (GMT)
From:	James Simmons <jsimmons@...radead.org>
To:	Richard Purdie <rpurdie@...ys.net>
cc:	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	akpm <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Marcin Juszkiewicz <openembedded@....one.pl>,
	Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
Subject: Re: Git backlight subsystem tree

On Thu, 8 Feb 2007, Richard Purdie wrote:

> On Thu, 2007-02-08 at 15:28 +0000, James Simmons wrote:
> > I have some patches that move the backlight away from using the class 
> > stuff. The only problem is the patch requires all backlight devices 
> > to be linked to a real struct device. Right now the acpi backligths are 
> > not.
> 
> Why would you want to do that?
> 
> The whole point of having this is so that backlights appear as a
> standard interface under /sys/class/backlight.
> 
> An example of why standardised interfaces are good would be someone
> writing an applet for a handheld to control the backlight brightness.
> With the class in place, the applet can easily work with any backlight.
> Without it, it has to be written for each backlight.
> 
> So this is a very strong NAK but I'm curious why you'd want to do it...

I CC Greg to explain. The backlight class didn't go away. The way it is 
handled is different.
-
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/