<html> <head> <base href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/" /> </head> <body> <div> <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_NEEDINFO " title="NEEDINFO - backlight maxed out when switching from X to a tty" href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=83816#c13">Comment # 13</a> on <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_NEEDINFO " title="NEEDINFO - backlight maxed out when switching from X to a tty" href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=83816">bug 83816</a> from <a class="email" href="mailto:jani.nikula@intel.com" title="Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>"> Jani Nikula</a> <pre>(In reply to Chris Wilson from <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=83816#c12">comment #12</a>) > (In reply to Jani Nikula from <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=83816#c10">comment #10</a>) > > (In reply to Chris Wilson from <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=83816#c7">comment #7</a>) > > > The bug is that intel_panel_enable_backlight() always sets the max value > > > ignoring the current user value. > > > > That's not really true. It sets the max value if the userspace set the level > > to minimum before the backlight was disabled. Why does the userspace insist > > on setting backlight to min before disable? > > To put it another way: Why does the kernel insist on providing policy that > overrides userspace? Hysterical raisins, dating back to i915 mode setting support in 2008. I assume pretty much impossible to remove now, since too many use cases depend on being able to see something when the connector is enabled, regardless of the backlight setting. For the record, I wince every time I look at that if (level == min) level = max; bit in the code.</pre> </div> <hr> You are receiving this mail because: <ul> <li>You are the QA Contact for the bug.</li> <li>You are on the CC list for the bug.</li> <li>You are the assignee for the bug.</li> </ul> </body> </html>