On Tue, 2007-10-09 at 09:33 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 09, 2007 at 10:25:51AM +0200, Thomas Renninger wrote:
> > On Tue, 2007-10-09 at 08:59 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > > On Tue, Oct 09, 2007 at 08:21:14AM +0200, Thomas Renninger wrote:
> > > 
> > > > IMO a config variable that compiles out brightness control totally makes
> > > > more sense (and video, is there any functionality in ThinkPad acpi
> > > > driver that does not get supported by the video driver?).
> > > 
> > > No, older Thinkpads don't implement the video extension. It needs to be 
> > > handled at runtime.
> > 
> > Why?
> > If you have a recent Lenovo you don't need all this compiled in and do
> > not set it. Otherwise you add it.
> 
> If you have a recent Lenovo you don't need to worry about the extra few 
> hundred bytes of code this is going to take. There's no point in 
> microoptimising.

I don't care for a CONFIG_THINKPAD_VIDEO config, some people love
microoptimising, going through the kernel config, disabling everything
which their hardware does not support. It also structures a bit the
dozens of functionalities in the thinkpad module.

More important: CONFIG_THINKPAD_ACPI_BACKLIGHT_DESIRED variable is error
prone and should not get introduced, right?

   Thomas

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to