[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <079e6431-7f8d-4d92-a2f6-b5a5e64d25f4@sirena.org.uk>
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2025 12:36:20 +0000
From: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To: Daniel Thompson <daniel@...cstar.com>
Cc: Michael Grzeschik <mgr@...gutronix.de>,
Daniel Thompson <danielt@...nel.org>, linux-pwm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-fbdev@...r.kernel.org, Jingoo Han <jingoohan1@...il.com>,
Helge Deller <deller@....de>, Lee Jones <lee@...nel.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
Uwe Kleine-König <ukleinek@...nel.org>,
Pengutronix <kernel@...gutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] backlight: pwm_bl: apply the initial backlight state
with sane defaults
On Tue, Nov 25, 2025 at 11:34:18AM +0000, Daniel Thompson wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 25, 2025 at 09:24:26AM +0100, Michael Grzeschik wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 18, 2025 at 12:52:14PM +0000, Daniel Thompson wrote:
> > > Should we back out the patch for now?
> > I would be fine with that. But actually I would like to see the
> > proof that without the patch, this backtrace will not trigger.
> > Looking through the codepath, I could not directly find a case
> > where this should happen.
...
> > Mark, is there a way to rerun this without my patch?
> I have to admit I thought this was why Mark provided a bisect log!
Yeah, there should be a before and after for applying the patch in the
bisect log otherwise it wouldn't have got a result out.
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists