Sorry about the style. Do I need to resubmit?

My experience with the boards so far has been fine. Without the change multiple 
monitors don't work correctly. With the change they do. Boot up in BIOS seems 
to operate correctly. Linux version testing has ranged from 5.15 through 6.12 
and of course once top of tree recently.

Normally I probably wouldn't have bothered to intrude with this change, but 
then the now widespread use of secure boot and the impracticality of disabling 
secure boot in the Kaiser fleet when booting USB keys practically means that I 
need to get this change rolled out so that at least Debian will pick it up and 
produce signed kernels.


Wizard, 3rd Class

Sent from Proton Mail for Android.

-------- Original Message --------
On Monday, 06/22/26 at 01:22 Christian König <[email protected]> wrote:
On 6/19/26 20:45, Matthew Jacob wrote:
>
> These adapters typically are only supported by Barco on the Windows
> platform. However, with these changes in the linux driver, multiple
> monitor support should work correctly.
>
> Signed-off-by: Matthew Jacob <[email protected]>
> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_drv.c | 4 ++++
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_drv.c 
> b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_drv.c
> index 60debd543e44..e3ba168795cc 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_drv.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_drv.c
> @@ -1926,6 +1926,7 @@ static const struct pci_device_id pciidlist[] = {
>        {0x1002, 0x6646, PCI_ANY_ID, PCI_ANY_ID, 0, 0, 
> CHIP_BONAIRE|AMD_IS_MOBILITY},
>        {0x1002, 0x6647, PCI_ANY_ID, PCI_ANY_ID, 0, 0, 
> CHIP_BONAIRE|AMD_IS_MOBILITY},
>        {0x1002, 0x6649, PCI_ANY_ID, PCI_ANY_ID, 0, 0, CHIP_BONAIRE},
> +       {0x1002, 0x664D, PCI_ANY_ID, PCI_ANY_ID, 0, 0, CHIP_BONAIRE}, // 
> Barco MXRT-5600

Please no // style comments in kernel code.

Apart from that looks good to me, but I'm wondering if we shouldn't print a 
warning or similar.

It could be that those boards have non standard VBIOS changes and cause 
problems on Linux.

Regards,
Christian.

>        {0x1002, 0x6650, PCI_ANY_ID, PCI_ANY_ID, 0, 0, CHIP_BONAIRE},
>        {0x1002, 0x6651, PCI_ANY_ID, PCI_ANY_ID, 0, 0, CHIP_BONAIRE},
>        {0x1002, 0x6658, PCI_ANY_ID, PCI_ANY_ID, 0, 0, CHIP_BONAIRE},
> @@ -1995,6 +1996,7 @@ static const struct pci_device_id pciidlist[] = {
>        {0x1002, 0x6930, PCI_ANY_ID, PCI_ANY_ID, 0, 0, CHIP_TONGA},
>        {0x1002, 0x6938, PCI_ANY_ID, PCI_ANY_ID, 0, 0, CHIP_TONGA},
>        {0x1002, 0x6939, PCI_ANY_ID, PCI_ANY_ID, 0, 0, CHIP_TONGA},
> +       {0x1002, 0x693B, PCI_ANY_ID, PCI_ANY_ID, 0, 0, CHIP_TONGA}, // Barco 
> MXRT-7600
>        /* fiji */
>        {0x1002, 0x7300, PCI_ANY_ID, PCI_ANY_ID, 0, 0, CHIP_FIJI},
>        {0x1002, 0x730F, PCI_ANY_ID, PCI_ANY_ID, 0, 0, CHIP_FIJI},
> @@ -2023,6 +2025,7 @@ static const struct pci_device_id pciidlist[] = {
>        {0x1002, 0x67C4, PCI_ANY_ID, PCI_ANY_ID, 0, 0, CHIP_POLARIS10},
>        {0x1002, 0x67C7, PCI_ANY_ID, PCI_ANY_ID, 0, 0, CHIP_POLARIS10},
>        {0x1002, 0x67D0, PCI_ANY_ID, PCI_ANY_ID, 0, 0, CHIP_POLARIS10},
> +       {0x1002, 0x67D4, PCI_ANY_ID, PCI_ANY_ID, 0, 0, CHIP_POLARIS10}, // 
> Tentative Barco MXRT-8750
>        {0x1002, 0x67DF, PCI_ANY_ID, PCI_ANY_ID, 0, 0, CHIP_POLARIS10},
>        {0x1002, 0x67C8, PCI_ANY_ID, PCI_ANY_ID, 0, 0, CHIP_POLARIS10},
>        {0x1002, 0x67C9, PCI_ANY_ID, PCI_ANY_ID, 0, 0, CHIP_POLARIS10},
> @@ -2036,6 +2039,7 @@ static const struct pci_device_id pciidlist[] = {
>        {0x1002, 0x6985, PCI_ANY_ID, PCI_ANY_ID, 0, 0, CHIP_POLARIS12},
>        {0x1002, 0x6986, PCI_ANY_ID, PCI_ANY_ID, 0, 0, CHIP_POLARIS12},
>        {0x1002, 0x6987, PCI_ANY_ID, PCI_ANY_ID, 0, 0, CHIP_POLARIS12},
> +       {0x1002, 0x698F, PCI_ANY_ID, PCI_ANY_ID, 0, 0, CHIP_POLARIS12}, // 
> Tentative Barco MXRT-4700
>        {0x1002, 0x6995, PCI_ANY_ID, PCI_ANY_ID, 0, 0, CHIP_POLARIS12},
>        {0x1002, 0x6997, PCI_ANY_ID, PCI_ANY_ID, 0, 0, CHIP_POLARIS12},
>        {0x1002, 0x699F, PCI_ANY_ID, PCI_ANY_ID, 0, 0, CHIP_POLARIS12},
> --
> 2.47.3
>


Reply via email to