However. There's also the platform-specific modules (thinkpad etc) that
will provide their own backlight methods if the standard ACPI mechanism
isn't available. I didn't see any immediately obvious way of knowing
whether or not they were being provided.
I'm not too certain the best way to
On Tue, 2010-11-02 at 13:58 +1000, Ben Skeggs wrote:
On Fri, 2010-10-29 at 17:49 +0200, Aaron Sowry wrote:
It seems to be de facto standard to only expose kernel-level
backlight controls in the absence of ACPI, however nouveau does this
regardless of whether ACPI equivalents are available or
It was my understanding that the future direction the kernel was going
to go with this is that all detected backlight devices would be
exported, with a tag in sysfs describing the type of interface
(platform, firmware, direct hardware, whichever). Then it would be up to
userspace to pick the
On Tue, 2010-11-02 at 15:51 +0100, Aaron Sowry wrote:
However. There's also the platform-specific modules (thinkpad etc) that
will provide their own backlight methods if the standard ACPI mechanism
isn't available. I didn't see any immediately obvious way of knowing
whether or not they
Hi all,
I've compiled nouveau but am having trouble using it as the X driver.
After installation, Xorg.0.log throws
[ 3877.874] (II) LoadModule: nouveau
[ 3877.874] (WW) Warning, couldn't open module nouveau
[ 3877.874] (II) UnloadModule: nouveau
[ 3877.874] (EE) Failed to load module
Hi folks,
Please do not merge this patch. I'm just asking people with nv50+ to try
this very experimental patch. Hopefully, the results are good and I can
start rework the patch to make it run faster and, hopefully, flicker-free.
This patch introduces Ben Skeggs's PMS-based clock changing
On 03/11/10 07:42, Delan Azabani wrote:
Hi all,
I've compiled nouveau but am having trouble using it as the X driver.
After installation, Xorg.0.log throws
[ 3877.874] (II) LoadModule: nouveau
[ 3877.874] (WW) Warning, couldn't open module nouveau
[ 3877.874] (II) UnloadModule:
