On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 12:19, Patrice Dumas <pertu...@free.fr> wrote: > On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 11:51:58AM +0200, Kay Sievers wrote: >> >> It should be reasonable simple to let X provide internally a generic >> sysfs backlight driver which can be wired up from individual drivers >> like radeon. > > I am a complete outsider here, but my first reaction would be to say > that backlight is much lower level than X. It is also relevant in > console mode, for framebuffer... More a driver issue than an X issue.
It's the other way around. if X is taking control over the screen, it should take control over the backlight. Console issues, and custom setups are not really covered here. And I guess they always need custom stuff anyway. > It seems to me that the right reaction is > > Alex Deucher 2010-04-27 15:52:23 PDT > > What do we do on systems with drivers that don't support randr 1.2? Pretty > much all systems with a backlight control use the kernel backlight interface. Sure, and some of the current X drivers already use exactly that. > Then the response seems to refer to DRM which is something I am not > familiar with, but it seems to be something that other components than X > cannot use easily. The backlight is in /sys, everybody with the proper privileges can use this text-based interface. This is about providing and not providing abstract interfaces, not to solve uncommon cases which we can not really solve anyway. :) Kay _______________________________________________ devkit-devel mailing list devkit-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/devkit-devel
