On 5/29/26 11:56, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
On Thu, May 28, 2026 at 12:49:05AM -0500, Mario Limonciello (AMD) wrote:
This will show which connector in sysfs matches which backlight.
Signed-off-by: Mario Limonciello (AMD) <[email protected]>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/Kconfig | 1 +
drivers/gpu/drm/Makefile | 2 +
drivers/gpu/drm/drm_atomic_helper.c | 8 +
drivers/gpu/drm/drm_backlight.c | 430 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
drivers/gpu/drm/drm_connector.c | 12 +
drivers/gpu/drm/drm_drv.c | 8 +
drivers/gpu/drm/drm_mode_config.c | 7 +
drivers/gpu/drm/drm_mode_object.c | 66 ++++-
drivers/gpu/drm/drm_sysfs.c | 28 +-
drivers/video/backlight/backlight.c | 17 ++
include/drm/drm_backlight.h | 46 +++
include/drm/drm_connector.h | 3 +
include/drm/drm_mode_config.h | 5 +
include/linux/backlight.h | 13 +
14 files changed, 641 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
create mode 100644 drivers/gpu/drm/drm_backlight.c
create mode 100644 include/drm/drm_backlight.h
+
+static void __drm_backlight_worker(struct work_struct *w)
+{
+ struct drm_backlight *b = container_of(w, struct drm_backlight, work);
+ static const char * const ep[] = { "BACKLIGHT=1", NULL };
This caused compile errors on linux-next, I had to drop both const
specifiers from this declaration.
Yeah - my fault for trusting checkpatch suggestion right before sending
upstream and not compile testing because it looked "trivial".
Will fix in next spin.
+ struct backlight_device *bd;
+ bool send_uevent;
+ unsigned int v;
+
Nevertheless:
Tested-by: Dmitry Baryshkov <[email protected]> # SM8150-HDK
Much appreciated!
