On Tue, Aug 11, 2026 at 8:13 PM Greg KH <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 11, 2026 at 01:25:14PM -0400, Alex Deucher wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 11, 2026 at 11:25 AM Sergio Callegari > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > On 11/08/2026 10:08, Greg KH wrote: > > > > We aim to be "bug compatible" with Linus's branch, otherwise the > > > > "pressure" to fix those bugs goes down. But I defer to the maintainers > > > > of the code involved if it is being worked on, and they want it > > > > reverted, great, we can do that. Otherwise we prefer to leave it as-is. > > > > > > I understand. Sorry for asking about things that might be obvious to > > > most people here. My expectation was that only a selected subset of the > > > patches on the Linus' tree were to enter in stable, so do we really need > > > to have stable "bug compatible" wrt this bug? The original behavior was > > > not free of issues, but they were rather minor (a reporting issue). Now > > > we have this very bad behavior where the display remains dark. > > > > > > To make the matter worse, on systems that have encrypted root the screen > > > remains dark also on that password prompt (observed with plymouth). > > > > > > In any case, I managed testing 7.2.0RC7 and it is fine again. > > > > > > Looks like the Linus' tree has more changes wrt backlight, and the > > > interesting ones are probably those in the cumulative fix > > > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=973fd9493ec21f12e760fbbedeb7b0b2317c02f4. > > > > > > > Thanks for testing. It sounds like we should revert the change from > > stable. There must be some dependency we are missing in stable. > > Great, can someone send a revert? >
Just sent. Thanks. Alex > thanks, > > greg k-h
