Control: tags -1 upstream On Tue, Dec 06, 2016 at 05:05:41PM +0100, Rpnpif wrote: > Le 6 décembre 2016, Andreas Boll a écrit : > > xserver-xorg-video-intel has some special backlight handling [2] so > > it's plausible that an updated package could cause regressions related > > to backlight. > > > > [ 13.881] > > > X.Org X Server 1.16.4 > > > Release Date: 2014-12-20 > > > [ 13.881] X Protocol Version 11, Revision 0 > > > [ 13.881] Build Operating System: Linux 3.2.0-4-amd64 i686 Debian > > > [ 13.881] Current Operating System: Linux Asus-901 4.7.0-0.bpo.1-686-pae #1 SMP Debian 4.7.8-1~bpo8+1 (2016-10-19) i686 > > > [ 13.881] Kernel command line: BOOT_IMAGE=/boot/vmlinuz-4.7.0-0.bpo.1-686-pae root=UUID=2ed3bc82-5cc0-4529-a13c-2e6f80b5b588 ro resume=/dev/sdb1 quiet > > > > snip > > > > > [ 14.063] (II) intel(0): Using Kernel Mode Setting driver: i915, version 1.6.0 20160425 > > > [ 14.063] (II) intel(0): SNA compiled: xserver-xorg-video-intel 2:2.99.917+git20161105-1~bpo8+1 (Vincent Cheng <vcheng@debian.org>) > > > > Reassigning to xserver-xorg-video-intel for now. > > > > Thanks, > > Andreas > > > > [1] http://snapshot.debian.org/package/xserver-xorg-video-intel/ > > [2] https://cgit.freedesktop.org/xorg/driver/xf86-video-intel/log/?qt=grep&q=backlight > > You are right! > The 2:2.99.917+git20160706-1~bpo8+1 release works fine but not > 2:2.99.917+git20161105-1~bpo8+1. > > So it is really a regression on the last release. > Perhaps a wrong choice of the best iface or about, or other thing. > > My system have two backlight interfaces: > /sys/class/backlight/eeepc and /sys/class/backlight/intel_backlight > > The first is safer but the second permits atomic variations of the > backlight. > > Thank you. > > -- > Alain Rpnpif Please follow https://01.org/linuxgraphics/documentation/how-report-bugs to file a bug with intel. Let us know the bug number for tracking. Thanks, Andreas
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature