On Friday, May 26, 2017 05:39:53 PM Peter Hutterer wrote:
> On May 25 2017, Benjamin Tissoires wrote:
> > On May 15 2017 or thereabouts, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>
> > > >> >> Benjamin, my understanding is that this is the case, is it correct?
> > > >> >
> > > >> > That is correct. This patch I
On Friday, May 26, 2017 05:39:53 PM Peter Hutterer wrote:
> On May 25 2017, Benjamin Tissoires wrote:
> > On May 15 2017 or thereabouts, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>
> > > >> >> Benjamin, my understanding is that this is the case, is it correct?
> > > >> >
> > > >> > That is correct. This patch I
On May 25 2017, Benjamin Tissoires wrote:
> On May 15 2017 or thereabouts, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > >> >> Benjamin, my understanding is that this is the case, is it correct?
> > >> >
> > >> > That is correct. This patch I reverted introduces regression for
> > >> > professional
> > >> >
On May 25 2017, Benjamin Tissoires wrote:
> On May 15 2017 or thereabouts, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > >> >> Benjamin, my understanding is that this is the case, is it correct?
> > >> >
> > >> > That is correct. This patch I reverted introduces regression for
> > >> > professional
> > >> >
Hi,
> >> >> >> Benjamin, my understanding is that this is the case, is it correct?
> >> >> >
> >> >> > That is correct. This patch I reverted introduces regression for
> >> >> > professional
> >> >> > laptops that expect the LID switch to be reported accurately.
> >> >>
> >> >> And from a user's
Hi,
> >> >> >> Benjamin, my understanding is that this is the case, is it correct?
> >> >> >
> >> >> > That is correct. This patch I reverted introduces regression for
> >> >> > professional
> >> >> > laptops that expect the LID switch to be reported accurately.
> >> >>
> >> >> And from a user's
On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 10:08 AM, Benjamin Tissoires
wrote:
> Hi Rafael,
>
> On May 15 2017 or thereabouts, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>> >> >> Benjamin, my understanding is that this is the case, is it correct?
>> >> >
>> >> > That is correct. This patch I reverted
On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 10:08 AM, Benjamin Tissoires
wrote:
> Hi Rafael,
>
> On May 15 2017 or thereabouts, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>> >> >> Benjamin, my understanding is that this is the case, is it correct?
>> >> >
>> >> > That is correct. This patch I reverted introduces regression for
>> >>
Hi Rafael,
On May 15 2017 or thereabouts, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> >> >> Benjamin, my understanding is that this is the case, is it correct?
> >> >
> >> > That is correct. This patch I reverted introduces regression for
> >> > professional
> >> > laptops that expect the LID switch to be
Hi Rafael,
On May 15 2017 or thereabouts, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> >> >> Benjamin, my understanding is that this is the case, is it correct?
> >> >
> >> > That is correct. This patch I reverted introduces regression for
> >> > professional
> >> > laptops that expect the LID switch to be
Hi Lv,
[thank you Peter for jumping in the thread]
Just a few precisions regarding questions you asked:
On May 17 2017 or thereabouts, Zheng, Lv wrote:
[stripped]
> > [User space tools] *are* correct.
> > They are following the exported ACPI documentation
>
> I doubt. In ACPI world, Windows is
Hi Lv,
[thank you Peter for jumping in the thread]
Just a few precisions regarding questions you asked:
On May 17 2017 or thereabouts, Zheng, Lv wrote:
[stripped]
> > [User space tools] *are* correct.
> > They are following the exported ACPI documentation
>
> I doubt. In ACPI world, Windows is
Hi Lv
> > Yes, it's called a quirk. And the good practice is to register those
> > quirks and make them available to everybody. Being in hwdb in user space
> > or in acpi/button in kernel space doesn't matter, we need them.
>
> I have no objections but concerns related to the combination of
Hi Lv
> > Yes, it's called a quirk. And the good practice is to register those
> > quirks and make them available to everybody. Being in hwdb in user space
> > or in acpi/button in kernel space doesn't matter, we need them.
>
> I have no objections but concerns related to the combination of
Hi, Benjamin
> > What's that?
> > I mean, the bad faith?
> I already explained 4 times why we need to revert these two patches and
> why we need to keep 'method'. And you keep answering with long emails
> that you would rather not. I call it bad faith, sorry.
The 4 times explanations didn't
Hi, Benjamin
> > What's that?
> > I mean, the bad faith?
> I already explained 4 times why we need to revert these two patches and
> why we need to keep 'method'. And you keep answering with long emails
> that you would rather not. I call it bad faith, sorry.
The 4 times explanations didn't
On May 16 2017 or thereabouts, Zheng, Lv wrote:
> Hi, Benjamin
>
> > > > > > >> >> > > > > For example, such a hwdb entry is:
> > > > > > >> >> > > > > libinput:name:*Lid
> > > > > > >> >> > > > > Switch*:dmi:*svnMicrosoftCorporation:pnSurface3:*
> > > > > > >> >> > > > >
On May 16 2017 or thereabouts, Zheng, Lv wrote:
> Hi, Benjamin
>
> > > > > > >> >> > > > > For example, such a hwdb entry is:
> > > > > > >> >> > > > > libinput:name:*Lid
> > > > > > >> >> > > > > Switch*:dmi:*svnMicrosoftCorporation:pnSurface3:*
> > > > > > >> >> > > > >
Hi, Benjamin
> > > > > >> >> > > > > For example, such a hwdb entry is:
> > > > > >> >> > > > > libinput:name:*Lid
> > > > > >> >> > > > > Switch*:dmi:*svnMicrosoftCorporation:pnSurface3:*
> > > > > >> >> > > > > LIBINPUT_ATTR_LID_SWITCH_RELIABILITY=write_open
> > > > > >> >> Well, if it worked
Hi, Benjamin
> > > > > >> >> > > > > For example, such a hwdb entry is:
> > > > > >> >> > > > > libinput:name:*Lid
> > > > > >> >> > > > > Switch*:dmi:*svnMicrosoftCorporation:pnSurface3:*
> > > > > >> >> > > > > LIBINPUT_ATTR_LID_SWITCH_RELIABILITY=write_open
> > > > > >> >> Well, if it worked
On May 16 2017 or thereabouts, Zheng, Lv wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > From: linux-acpi-ow...@vger.kernel.org
> > [mailto:linux-acpi-ow...@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Zheng,
> > Lv
> > Subject: RE: [PATCH 2/2] Revert "ACPI / button: Change default behavior to
> &g
On May 16 2017 or thereabouts, Zheng, Lv wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > From: linux-acpi-ow...@vger.kernel.org
> > [mailto:linux-acpi-ow...@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Zheng,
> > Lv
> > Subject: RE: [PATCH 2/2] Revert "ACPI / button: Change default behavior to
> &g
Hi,
> From: linux-acpi-ow...@vger.kernel.org
> [mailto:linux-acpi-ow...@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Zheng,
> Lv
> Subject: RE: [PATCH 2/2] Revert "ACPI / button: Change default behavior to
> lid_init_state=open"
>
> Hi, Guys
>
> > From: Be
Hi,
> From: linux-acpi-ow...@vger.kernel.org
> [mailto:linux-acpi-ow...@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Zheng,
> Lv
> Subject: RE: [PATCH 2/2] Revert "ACPI / button: Change default behavior to
> lid_init_state=open"
>
> Hi, Guys
>
> > From: Be
Hi, Guys
> From: Benjamin Tissoires [mailto:benjamin.tissoi...@redhat.com]
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] Revert "ACPI / button: Change default behavior to
> lid_init_state=open"
>
> On May 15 2017 or thereabouts, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Mon, May 15, 2017
Hi, Guys
> From: Benjamin Tissoires [mailto:benjamin.tissoi...@redhat.com]
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] Revert "ACPI / button: Change default behavior to
> lid_init_state=open"
>
> On May 15 2017 or thereabouts, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Mon, May 15, 2017
oires
> >> <benjamin.tissoi...@redhat.com> wrote:
> >> > On May 12 2017 or thereabouts, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> >> >> On Friday, May 12, 2017 02:36:20 AM Zheng, Lv wrote:
> >> >> > Hi,
> >> >> >
> >> >> > &
t; On May 12 2017 or thereabouts, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> >> >> On Friday, May 12, 2017 02:36:20 AM Zheng, Lv wrote:
> >> >> > Hi,
> >> >> >
> >> >> > > From: Benjamin Tissoires [mailto:benjamin.tissoi...@redhat.com]
>
May 12 2017 or thereabouts, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>> >> On Friday, May 12, 2017 02:36:20 AM Zheng, Lv wrote:
>> >> > Hi,
>> >> >
>> >> > > From: Benjamin Tissoires [mailto:benjamin.tissoi...@redhat.com]
>> >> &
, May 12, 2017 02:36:20 AM Zheng, Lv wrote:
>> >> > Hi,
>> >> >
>> >> > > From: Benjamin Tissoires [mailto:benjamin.tissoi...@redhat.com]
>> >> > > Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] Revert "ACPI / button: Change default
>> >>
Zheng, Lv wrote:
> >> > Hi,
> >> >
> >> > > From: Benjamin Tissoires [mailto:benjamin.tissoi...@redhat.com]
> >> > > Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] Revert "ACPI / button: Change default
> >> > > behavior to lid_init_state=open"
> >>
t;> >
> >> > > From: Benjamin Tissoires [mailto:benjamin.tissoi...@redhat.com]
> >> > > Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] Revert "ACPI / button: Change default
> >> > > behavior to lid_init_state=open"
> >> > >
> >> > > On Ma
ssoires [mailto:benjamin.tissoi...@redhat.com]
>> > > Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] Revert "ACPI / button: Change default behavior
>> > > to lid_init_state=open"
>> > >
>> > > On May 11 2017 or thereabouts, Zheng, Lv wrote:
>> > > > Hi,
>
>> > > Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] Revert "ACPI / button: Change default behavior
>> > > to lid_init_state=open"
>> > >
>> > > On May 11 2017 or thereabouts, Zheng, Lv wrote:
>> > > > Hi,
>> > > >
>> > >
On May 12 2017 or thereabouts, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Friday, May 12, 2017 02:36:20 AM Zheng, Lv wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > > From: Benjamin Tissoires [mailto:benjamin.tissoi...@redhat.com]
> > > Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] Revert "ACPI / button: Change def
On May 12 2017 or thereabouts, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Friday, May 12, 2017 02:36:20 AM Zheng, Lv wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > > From: Benjamin Tissoires [mailto:benjamin.tissoi...@redhat.com]
> > > Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] Revert "ACPI / button: Change def
On Friday, May 12, 2017 02:36:20 AM Zheng, Lv wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > From: Benjamin Tissoires [mailto:benjamin.tissoi...@redhat.com]
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] Revert "ACPI / button: Change default behavior to
> > lid_init_state=open"
> >
> >
On Friday, May 12, 2017 02:36:20 AM Zheng, Lv wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > From: Benjamin Tissoires [mailto:benjamin.tissoi...@redhat.com]
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] Revert "ACPI / button: Change default behavior to
> > lid_init_state=open"
> >
> >
Hi,
> From: Benjamin Tissoires [mailto:benjamin.tissoi...@redhat.com]
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] Revert "ACPI / button: Change default behavior to
> lid_init_state=open"
>
> On May 11 2017 or thereabouts, Zheng, Lv wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > > Fr
Hi,
> From: Benjamin Tissoires [mailto:benjamin.tissoi...@redhat.com]
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] Revert "ACPI / button: Change default behavior to
> lid_init_state=open"
>
> On May 11 2017 or thereabouts, Zheng, Lv wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > > Fr
On May 11 2017 or thereabouts, Zheng, Lv wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > From: Benjamin Tissoires [mailto:benjamin.tissoi...@redhat.com]
> > Subject: [PATCH 2/2] Revert "ACPI / button: Change default behavior to
> > lid_init_state=open"
> >
> > This reverts commit 77e9a4aa9de10cc1418bf9a892366988802a8025.
>
On May 11 2017 or thereabouts, Zheng, Lv wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > From: Benjamin Tissoires [mailto:benjamin.tissoi...@redhat.com]
> > Subject: [PATCH 2/2] Revert "ACPI / button: Change default behavior to
> > lid_init_state=open"
> >
> > This reverts commit 77e9a4aa9de10cc1418bf9a892366988802a8025.
>
Hi,
> From: Benjamin Tissoires [mailto:benjamin.tissoi...@redhat.com]
> Subject: [PATCH 2/2] Revert "ACPI / button: Change default behavior to
> lid_init_state=open"
>
> This reverts commit 77e9a4aa9de10cc1418bf9a892366988802a8025.
>
> Even if the method implementation can be buggy on some
Hi,
> From: Benjamin Tissoires [mailto:benjamin.tissoi...@redhat.com]
> Subject: [PATCH 2/2] Revert "ACPI / button: Change default behavior to
> lid_init_state=open"
>
> This reverts commit 77e9a4aa9de10cc1418bf9a892366988802a8025.
>
> Even if the method implementation can be buggy on some
44 matches
Mail list logo