linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] ACPI / Video: blacklist some samsung laptops

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <20120108104630.GA4354@ubuntu-mba>
Date:	Sun, 8 Jan 2012 11:46:30 +0100
From:	Seth Forshee <seth.forshee@...onical.com>
To:	Corentin Chary <corentincj@...aif.net>
Cc:	platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org,
	Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@...el.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Andrzej Prochyra <andrzej@...chyra.name>,
	Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>,
	David Herrmann <dh.herrmann@...glemail.com>,
	Richard Schütz <r.schtz@...nline.de>,
	Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ACPI / Video: blacklist some samsung laptops

On Sat, Jan 07, 2012 at 03:12:38PM +0100, Corentin Chary wrote:
> On these laptops, the ACPI video is not functional, and very unlikely
> to be fixed by the vendor. Note that intel_backlight works for some
> of these laptops, and the backlight from samsung-laptop always work.
> 
> The good news is that newer laptops have functional ACPI video device
> and won't end up growing this list.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Corentin Chary <corentincj@...aif.net>
> ---
> 
> Could the concerned people test this patch and check that it correctly
> disable the acpi_video backlight ?
> 
>  drivers/acpi/video_detect.c |   40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  1 files changed, 40 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/video_detect.c b/drivers/acpi/video_detect.c
> index 45d8097..376bce2 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/video_detect.c
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/video_detect.c
> @@ -132,6 +132,44 @@ find_video(acpi_handle handle, u32 lvl, void *context, void **rv)
>  	return AE_OK;
>  }
>  
> +/* Force to use vendor driver when the ACPI device is known to be
> + * buggy */
> +static int video_detect_force_vendor(const struct dmi_system_id *d)
> +{
> +	acpi_video_support |= ACPI_VIDEO_BACKLIGHT_DMI_VENDOR;
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static struct dmi_system_id video_detect_dmi_table[] = {
> +	{
> +	 .callback = video_detect_force_vendor,
> +	 .ident = "N150P",
> +	 .matches = {
> +		DMI_MATCH(DMI_SYS_VENDOR, "SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD."),
> +		DMI_MATCH(DMI_PRODUCT_NAME, "N150P"),
> +		DMI_MATCH(DMI_BOARD_NAME, "N150P"),
> +		},
> +	},
> +	{
> +	 .callback = video_detect_force_vendor,
> +	 .ident = "N145P/N250P/N260P",
> +	 .matches = {
> +		DMI_MATCH(DMI_SYS_VENDOR, "SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD."),
> +		DMI_MATCH(DMI_PRODUCT_NAME, "N145P/N250P/N260P"),
> +		DMI_MATCH(DMI_BOARD_NAME, "N145P/N250P/N260P"),
> +		},
> +	},
> +	{
> +	 .callback = video_detect_force_vendor,
> +	 .ident = "N150/N210/N220",
> +	 .matches = {
> +		DMI_MATCH(DMI_SYS_VENDOR, "SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD."),
> +		DMI_MATCH(DMI_PRODUCT_NAME, "N150/N210/N220"),
> +		DMI_MATCH(DMI_BOARD_NAME, "N150/N210/N220"),
> +		},
> +	},
> +};
> +

I don't see NF110/NF210/NF310 in this list. Was that an oversight?
--
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/