On Sat, 2008-02-02 at 09:30 -0200, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
On Fri, 01 Feb 2008, Len Brown wrote:
You might check if CONFIG_ACPI_VIDEO=m is set and you can load the video
module.
While the sony may be non-standard and not load, your thinkpad may work.
[...]
We really need to
Applied.
thanks,
-Len
On Tuesday 25 December 2007 21:03, Matthew Garrett wrote:
The sysfs backlight class provides no mechanism for querying the
acceptable brightness for a backlight. The ACPI spec states that values
are only valid if they are reported as available by the firmware. Since
On Monday 28 January 2008 00:10, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 01:25:50 + Matthew Garrett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, Jan 26, 2008 at 10:00:45PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
- Create a new /sys node with a new name which has the new semantics.
The semantics are the
On Sat, Jan 26, 2008 at 10:00:45PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
- Create a new /sys node with a new name which has the new semantics.
The semantics are the same as they always have been - values between 0
and max_brightness are valid values. If you've made assumptions about
what max_brightness
On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 01:25:50 + Matthew Garrett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, Jan 26, 2008 at 10:00:45PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
- Create a new /sys node with a new name which has the new semantics.
The semantics are the same as they always have been - values between 0
and
On Sun, Jan 27, 2008 at 09:10:13PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
You cannot seriously tell me that if we are to change this range from 0-8
up to 0-100 then this is not a backwards-incompatible change in
semantics.
We're talking about changing 0-100 to 0-something sane, because the
current
On Thu, Jan 24, 2008 at 04:44:48PM -0500, Len Brown wrote:
On Tuesday 25 December 2007 21:03, Matthew Garrett wrote:
The sysfs backlight class provides no mechanism for querying the
acceptable brightness for a backlight. The ACPI spec states that values
are only valid if they are reported
On Thu, 24 Jan 2008 16:44:48 -0500 Len Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tuesday 25 December 2007 21:03, Matthew Garrett wrote:
The sysfs backlight class provides no mechanism for querying the
acceptable brightness for a backlight. The ACPI spec states that values
are only valid if they
On Wed, 2007-12-26 at 02:03 +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
The sysfs backlight class provides no mechanism for querying the
acceptable brightness for a backlight. The ACPI spec states that values
are only valid if they are reported as available by the firmware. Since
we can't provide that
On Tue, Jan 22, 2008 at 04:33:29PM +0800, Zhang Rui wrote:
I have no obvious objection on either of these two proposals.
But one thing to mention is that
both of these two patches is written on the assumption that the
brightness levels listed in _BCL method are in ascending order, while
this
On Tue, 22 Jan 2008, Matthew Garrett wrote:
On Tue, Jan 22, 2008 at 04:33:29PM +0800, Zhang Rui wrote:
I have no obvious objection on either of these two proposals.
But one thing to mention is that
both of these two patches is written on the assumption that the
brightness levels listed in
The sysfs backlight class provides no mechanism for querying the
acceptable brightness for a backlight. The ACPI spec states that values
are only valid if they are reported as available by the firmware. Since
we can't provide that information to userspace, instead collapse the
range to the
12 matches
Mail list logo
