1. 29 8月, 2009 1 次提交
  2. 24 6月, 2009 3 次提交
  3. 18 6月, 2009 1 次提交
  4. 30 5月, 2009 3 次提交
  5. 08 5月, 2009 1 次提交
  6. 25 4月, 2009 1 次提交
  7. 20 4月, 2009 1 次提交
  8. 18 4月, 2009 1 次提交
  9. 11 4月, 2009 1 次提交
    • Z
      ACPI video: handle indexed _BQC correctly · e047cca6
      Zhang Rui 提交于
      In the current code, for a box with an indexed _BQC method, we
      1. get the current brightness level by evaluating _BQC
      2. set the value gotten in step 1 to _BCM
      3. get the current brightness level again
      4. set the _BQC_use_index flag if the results gotten
         in step 1 and in step 3 don't equal.
      
      But this logic doesn't work actually, because the _BQC_use_index
      is not set when acpi_video_device_lcd_set_level is invoked.
      This results in a failure in step 2.
      http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12249#c83
      
      Now, we set the _BQC_use_index flag after invoking _BQC for the first
      time. And reevaluate the _BQC to get the correct brightness level.
      Signed-off-by: NZhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>
      Signed-off-by: NLen Brown <len.brown@intel.com>
      e047cca6
  10. 08 4月, 2009 1 次提交
  11. 04 4月, 2009 3 次提交
  12. 31 3月, 2009 1 次提交
    • A
      proc 2/2: remove struct proc_dir_entry::owner · 99b76233
      Alexey Dobriyan 提交于
      Setting ->owner as done currently (pde->owner = THIS_MODULE) is racy
      as correctly noted at bug #12454. Someone can lookup entry with NULL
      ->owner, thus not pinning enything, and release it later resulting
      in module refcount underflow.
      
      We can keep ->owner and supply it at registration time like ->proc_fops
      and ->data.
      
      But this leaves ->owner as easy-manipulative field (just one C assignment)
      and somebody will forget to unpin previous/pin current module when
      switching ->owner. ->proc_fops is declared as "const" which should give
      some thoughts.
      
      ->read_proc/->write_proc were just fixed to not require ->owner for
      protection.
      
      rmmod'ed directories will be empty and return "." and ".." -- no harm.
      And directories with tricky enough readdir and lookup shouldn't be modular.
      We definitely don't want such modular code.
      
      Removing ->owner will also make PDE smaller.
      
      So, let's nuke it.
      
      Kudos to Jeff Layton for reminding about this, let's say, oversight.
      
      http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12454Signed-off-by: NAlexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@gmail.com>
      99b76233
  13. 28 3月, 2009 7 次提交
  14. 20 2月, 2009 1 次提交
  15. 07 2月, 2009 1 次提交
  16. 03 2月, 2009 2 次提交
  17. 31 12月, 2008 1 次提交
  18. 12 12月, 2008 1 次提交
  19. 08 11月, 2008 3 次提交
  20. 07 11月, 2008 1 次提交
  21. 23 10月, 2008 1 次提交
  22. 11 10月, 2008 2 次提交
  23. 22 7月, 2008 1 次提交
  24. 18 7月, 2008 1 次提交