[Intel-gfx] [PATCH] Revert "drm/i915: Parsing LFP brightness control from VBT"

[Daniel Vetter]

On Wed, Jan 07, 2015 at 10:30:46AM +0200, Jani Nikula wrote:
> On Wed, 07 Jan 2015, Daniel Vetter <daniel at ffwll.ch> wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 06, 2015 at 02:48:15PM -0500, Rodrigo Vivi wrote:
> >> This reverts commit 371abae844ede392066bfc21202b2e40f4a654d1.
> >> 
> >> This data seems unreliable and causing many issues and blocking other
> >> teams and feature implementation. Safest way is to revert that for now.
> >> 
> >> Reference: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=88081
> >> Reference: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=88039
> 
> IMO s/Reference/Bugzilla/

Yup, Bugzilla is for bugs fixed by this patch, References: is more for fyi
stuff and mailing lists. Regressions should always have a bugzilla,
otherwise QA has let something slip through.
> 
> Also
> 
> Bugzilla: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=87671
> 
> >> Cc: Ben Widawsky <ben at bwidawsk.net>
> >> Cc: Kristian Høgsberg <hoegsberg at gmail.com>
> >> Signed-off-by: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi at intel.com>
> >
> > Cc: Vandana Kannan <vandana.kannan at intel.com>
> > Cc: Deepak M <m.deepak at intel.com>
> > Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula at intel.com>
> >
> > When submitting a revert please include the cc/submitter/reviewers from
> > the original patch too. I've done that now.
> 
> The code agrees with the spec, but the VBT on these machines quite
> obviously does not agree with the spec.
> 
> Vandana, I think you're in a better position than us to figure out
> what's going on with VBT vs. the spec.
> 
> Daniel, please just pick this up now.
> 
> Reviewed-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula at intel.com>

Queued for -next, thanks for the patch.
-Daniel
-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
+41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch