[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <90093af0-7226-4ec4-b528-d6a23ea30c88@gmx.de>
Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2025 11:51:19 +0100
From: Armin Wolf <W_Armin@....de>
To: Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: jlee@...e.com, Bugaddr@...tonmail.com, Hans de Goede <hansg@...nel.org>,
platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] platform/x86: acer-wmi: Ignore backlight event
Am 18.11.25 um 11:47 schrieb Ilpo Järvinen:
> On Tue, 18 Nov 2025, Armin Wolf wrote:
>
>> Am 18.11.25 um 09:11 schrieb Ilpo Järvinen:
>>
>>> On Mon, 17 Nov 2025 16:59:38 +0100, Armin Wolf wrote:
>>>
>>>> On the Acer Nitro AN515-58, the event 4 - 0 is send by the ACPI
>>>> firmware when the backlight up/down keys are pressed. Ignore this
>>>> event to avoid spamming the kernel log with error messages, as the
>>>> acpi-video driver already handles brightness up/down events.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Thank you for your contribution, it has been applied to my local
>>> review-ilpo-fixes branch. Note it will show up in the public
>>> platform-drivers-x86/review-ilpo-fixes branch only once I've pushed my
>>> local branch there, which might take a while.
>> Thank you. I just noticed that i made a slight error inside the patch
>> description:
>> Tested-by: Reported-by: Bugaddr<Bugaddr@...tonmail.com>
>>
>> Could you fix that up inside your branch?
> Hi,
>
> Hmm, I didn't notice it myself but think b4 did change it as this is
> what I've in the commit 444a9256f8d106e08a6bc2dc8ef28a8699e4b3ba:
>
> Reported-by: Bugaddr <Bugaddr@...tonmail.com>
> Closes: https://bugaddr.tech/posts/2025-11-16-debugging-the-acer-nitro-5-an515-58-fn-f10-keyboard-backlight-bug-on-linux/#wmi-interface-issues
> Tested-by: Bugaddr <Bugaddr@...tonmail.com>
> Signed-off-by: Armin Wolf <W_Armin@....de>
> Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20251117155938.3030-1-W_Armin@gmx.de
> Reviewed-by: Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@...ux.intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@...ux.intel.com>
>
> ?
Strange, but the tags are indeed correct. In this case no further action seems to be necessary.
Thanks,
Armin Wolf
Powered by blists - more mailing lists