<html>
    <head>
      <base href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/">
    </head>
    <body>
      <p>
        <div>
            <b><a class="bz_bug_link 
          bz_status_NEW "
   title="NEW - [CHV] Backlight init fails on Surface 3 if module load order is wrong"
   href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=96571#c67">Comment # 67</a>
              on <a class="bz_bug_link 
          bz_status_NEW "
   title="NEW - [CHV] Backlight init fails on Surface 3 if module load order is wrong"
   href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=96571">bug 96571</a>
              from <span class="vcard"><a class="email" href="mailto:jani.nikula@intel.com" title="Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>"> <span class="fn">Jani Nikula</span></a>
</span></b>
        <pre>(In reply to youling257 from <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=96571#c61">comment #61</a>)
<span class="quote">> CONFIG_I2C_DESIGNWARE_CORE=y
> CONFIG_I2C_DESIGNWARE_PLATFORM=y
> CONFIG_I2C_DESIGNWARE_SLAVE=y
> CONFIG_I2C_DESIGNWARE_PCI=y
> CONFIG_I2C_DESIGNWARE_BAYTRAIL=y
> CONFIG_PWM=y
> CONFIG_PWM_SYSFS=y
> CONFIG_PWM_CRC=y
> CONFIG_PWM_LPSS=y
> CONFIG_PWM_LPSS_PCI=y
> CONFIG_PWM_LPSS_PLATFORM=y

>  [drm:pwm_setup_backlight [i915]] *ERROR* Failed to own the pwm chip
> I see this problem happen again with Linux 5.3rc1 kernel on my BayTrail
> z3735f device! can't adjust brightness.

> Linux 5.3, what reason?</span >

So it looks like this comment hijacked the bug about something completely
different, and now we have a patch en route upstream claiming it fixes this
bug, while in truth the original LPSS issues is not fixed. :(</pre>
        </div>
      </p>


      <hr>
      <span>You are receiving this mail because:</span>

      <ul>
          <li>You are on the CC list for the bug.</li>
          <li>You are the QA Contact for the bug.</li>
          <li>You are the assignee for the bug.</li>
      </ul>
    </body>
</html>