[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0702221558550.29542@pentafluge.infradead.org>
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 16:00:16 +0000 (GMT)
From: James Simmons <jsimmons@...radead.org>
To: Richard Purdie <rpurdie@...ys.net>
cc: Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@....eng.br>,
Alex Romosan <romosan@...orax.lbl.gov>,
Yaroslav Halchenko <kernel@...russian.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-fbdev-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: no backlight on radeon after recent kernel "upgrade"s
> > Howerver, I *do* strongly wish for a way to combine various drivers into a
> > single backlight device, where radeon/intelfb takes care of some stuff,
> > ibm-acpi/asus-laptop/sony-laptop takes care of other stuff, etc. Also, a
> > standard naming for the builtin screen(s) would help, calling it "ibm",
> > "asus", "sony" is not good IMHO.
>
> I wasn't aware of this problem. If some devices need bits from both
> raedon/whatever and acpi, the current implementations are just plain
> wrong. Its not really a backlight class problem and more of an
> implementation and interaction problem between acpi and the framebuffer
> drivers. They should be presenting and registering *one* backlight class
> device, not two. Without knowing more about the circumstances and
> how/when to combine which drivers its hard for me to help further...
This is always been a problem. For the fbdev layer you can run vesafb with
a specific fbdev driver and they both access the same hardware. There is
no really way around this. The user has to be smart enough to not enable
bothe drivers.
-
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists