On Tue, 2007-10-09 at 14:34 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 09, 2007 at 03:29:12PM +0200, Thomas Renninger wrote:
> > static const struct acpi_device_id dummy_vid_device_ids[] = {
> > {"LNXVIDEO", 0},
> > {"", 0},
> > };
>
> No. This will match if any of the video extension is implemented. We
> only want it to match if backlight control is implemented. There are
> plenty of Thinkpads that implement a subset of the video extension but
> still need backlight control to be handled via the Thinkpad-specific
> routes.
Yep, I just realized that :(
Maybe all required funcs (_BCM,_BCL,...) should get checked, but must
not be invoked or I am pretty sure brightness switch through buttons
won't work because the notify handler isn't used.
I wonder how we should make the video module not load then in a sane way
on those, udev rules in userspace would be very dirty..., dmiscan for
ThinkPad in scan.c and only set LNXVIDEO if _BCM,_BCL... are there also,
maybe the latter is acceptable?
Thomas
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
