| 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
| ||
|
Message-Id: <201105111447.49816.jasonbstubbs@gmail.com> 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists