Bug#571215: Backlight turned off during bootup
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256
maximilian attems wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 03:29:04PM +0100, Uli Schlachter wrote:
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: SHA256
>>
>> maximilian attems wrote:
>>> On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 12:58:54PM +0100, Uli Schlachter wrote:
>>>> This morning when I booted my laptop, right after grub was done, the backlight
>>>> turned off. I collected the attached info by entering my HDD passphrase blindly
>>>> and starting up X (which partly worked but was damn slow).
>>>>
>>>> Kernel is 2.6.32-trunk-amd64.
>>> old, newer one is available in unstable: 2.6.32-8, check against it.
>> Uhm, I might be blind...
>> I installed the following. I'll report back with the results this
>> evening.
>>
>> [AKTUALISIERUNG] linux-image-2.6-amd64 2.6.32+23 -> 2.6.32+24
>
> please corret your apt sources or whatever, I spoke about unstable
> and there you have linux-image-2.6.32-2-amd64
I'm now running this (thanks for the hint with the package name):
$ uname -a
Linux psytux 2.6.32-2-amd64 #1 SMP Fri Feb 12 00:01:47 UTC 2010 x86_64 GNU/Linux
>> ii hotkey-setup 0.1-23
>> auto-configures laptop hotkeys
>
> nuke it and reboot, probably cures your trouble not to have it.
Neither of this helped my backlight, but booting with vga=ext as suggested by
Marco d'Itri made everything work (and the kernel suddenly starts to notice my
second screen...)
Julien Cristau wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 12:58:54 +0100, Uli Schlachter wrote:
>> > Feb 24 12:34:40 psytux kernel: [ 0.548357] vesafb: framebuffer at 0x80000000, mapped to 0xffffc90010980000, using 5120k, total 5120k
>> > Feb 24 12:34:40 psytux kernel: [ 0.548360] vesafb: mode is 1280x1024x32, linelength=5120, pages=0
>> > Feb 24 12:34:40 psytux kernel: [ 0.548362] vesafb: scrolling: redraw
>> > Feb 24 12:34:40 psytux kernel: [ 0.548364] vesafb: Truecolor: size=8:8:8:8, shift=24:16:8:0
>> > Feb 24 12:34:40 psytux kernel: [ 0.588241] Console: switching to colour frame buffer device 160x64
>> > Feb 24 12:34:40 psytux kernel: [ 0.628004] fb0: VESA VGA frame buffer device
> [...]
>> > Feb 24 12:34:40 psytux kernel: [ 0.732304] [drm] Initialized drm 1.1.0 20060810
>> > Feb 24 12:34:40 psytux kernel: [ 0.743618] i915 0000:00:02.0: PCI INT A -> GSI 16 (level, low) -> IRQ 16
>> > Feb 24 12:34:40 psytux kernel: [ 0.743622] i915 0000:00:02.0: setting latency timer to 64
>> > Feb 24 12:34:40 psytux kernel: [ 0.758588] alloc irq_desc for 29 on node -1
>> > Feb 24 12:34:40 psytux kernel: [ 0.758592] alloc kstat_irqs on node -1
>> > Feb 24 12:34:40 psytux kernel: [ 0.758601] i915 0000:00:02.0: irq 29 for MSI/MSI-X
>> > Feb 24 12:34:40 psytux kernel: [ 0.758608] [drm] set up 63M of stolen space
>> > Feb 24 12:34:40 psytux kernel: [ 1.320148] [drm] TV-20: set mode NTSC 480i 0
>> > Feb 24 12:34:40 psytux kernel: [ 1.466907] fb: conflicting fb hw usage inteldrmfb vs VESA VGA - removing generic driver
>> > Feb 24 12:34:40 psytux kernel: [ 1.467017] fb1: inteldrmfb frame buffer device
>
> Screwed up handoff from vesafb to i915. Should be fixed with today's
> 2.6.32-9 hopefully. Although really you shouldn't be using vesafb.
Uhm, I don't think I'm using vesafb on purpose, am I?
My current /proc/cmdline is this: (no idea where I got that video= from)
BOOT_IMAGE=//vmlinuz-2.6.32-2-amd64 root=/dev/mapper/psytux-root ro video=i915
quiet vga=ext
I'll try 2.6.32-9 once it hits my mirror.
Cheers,
Uli
- --
- - Buck, when exactly did you lose your mind?
- - Three months ago. I woke up one morning married to a pineapple.
An ugly pineapple... But I loved her!
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJLhWYrAAoJECLkKOvLj8sG7XQH/1Nir1cpi+fdEf6LLM6ekvMO
x5j53+uV3rZvwKbDU4UdOEwetMMQso4qffhAgNvFGwsjKO5skwaEO8YsCt7SB3Qf
zARMozNYxaqqo1w6VUap0upI7/rgQsMQoq4EmEJx3TE0ksRpyMiTX6znef/BeM+0
ZWvGv8nKk3u+0YjP0BJae31rVdc9MgbfvqlJM+fHjzZaVPUnZ18gi8o6hUkRXizo
zuv8LB3F6EdSrhMLCfd8E42sOfPtGwOcTlfQ8LpsvoKCkkObISn39zt+ahSPIn7Q
DlM3gu9iTY9TklgfnfhcpglSv1udAo5lO6vJl62mCi9UkuSPbtWW/dGY4aPSImc=
=Bre8
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: