Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758064Ab1ELQss (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 May 2011 12:48:48 -0400 Received: from kroah.org ([198.145.64.141]:52515 "EHLO coco.kroah.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758061Ab1ELQsm (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 May 2011 12:48:42 -0400 Date: Thu, 12 May 2011 09:44:02 -0700 From: Greg KH To: Jason Stubbs Cc: Greg KH , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] platform: fix samsung brightness min/max calculations Message-ID: <20110512164402.GD26585@kroah.com> References: <201104201358.50443.jasonbstubbs@gmail.com> <201105111447.49816.jasonbstubbs@gmail.com> <20110511135114.GD12717@kroah.com> <201105121214.00015.jasonbstubbs@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <201105121214.00015.jasonbstubbs@gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2564 Lines: 64 On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 12:13:59PM +1000, Jason Stubbs wrote: > On Wed, 11 May 2011 23:51:14 Greg KH wrote: > > On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 02:47:49PM +1000, Jason Stubbs wrote: > > > On Wed, 11 May 2011 08:39:08 Greg KH wrote: > > > > On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 06:55:50PM +1000, Jason Stubbs wrote: > > > > > Not sure of the "bump" process, so I'll just go over each part of the > > > > > patch. > > > > > > > > > > Note that all the changes only affect the sabi_config where > > > > > min_brightness is 1 so you might not see in difference on your > > > > > hardware. > > > > > > > > This isn't needed anymore due to your other patch superseeding it, > > > > right? > > > > > > Actually, this one is irrelevant to the nc210/nc110 support as that > > > laptop uses the "SwSmi@" sabi. It was just something I noticed while > > > learning the code. The miscalculations will only affect any laptops that > > > use the "SECLINUX" sabi but I tested it by setting min_brightness to 2 > > > for my laptop. > > > > That's wierd, as that is the type of laptop I have here and it seems to > > work just fine for me as-is. > > Throwing a printk of user_level into set_brightness when min_brightness = 1, > I get the following behaviour: > > # cd /sys/class/backlight/samsung > # for x in 8 7 2 1 0; do echo $x > brightness; done > # dmesg | tail -n6 > user_level is 0x07 > user_level is 0x06 > user_level is 0x01 > user_level is 0x00 > user_level is 0xff > samsung_laptop: SABI set command 0x11 failed with completion flag 0xaa and data 0xff > > Essentially, setting brightness to the maximum actually sets it one less and > setting it to zero does bad thngs. Ah, ok, nice catch, thanks, I've queued up your patch now. > > > The patch doesn't apply cleanly on top of the nc210/nc110 patch though as > > > they both modify set_brightness(). It might apply with a higher fuzz > > > factor as the changes don't actually clash. Should I redo the patch? > > > > Please do. > > Will send seperately. Doing this though, I found a problem with the > nc210/nc110 patch in that (user_level == read_brightness()) check should > actually be (user_brightness == read_brightness()). What should I do about > this? I don't know, as you seem to understand this better than I do at this point, I'll trust your changes :) thanks, greg k-h -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/