Daniel Drake wrote: > H. Peter Anvin wrote: >> User error. >> Please replace user and press any key. >> >> # CONFIG_FIRMWARE_EDID is not set >> >> The user has *explicitly* disabled acquisition of EDID from the >> firmware, so of course it doesn't probe for it. > > I'm not versed with all this EDID and resolution stuff, but shouldn't > the resolution be detected correctly under all configurations?
Not if you actively disable detection! Why would you want to be able to disable detection? Well, your BIOS might be buggy. > The original problem is that as of 2.6.20.11, the resolution is > misdetected - it is wrong by 6 pixels. The same configuration with > 2.6.20.10 works fine. That is because 2.6.20.11 incorrectly disabled EDID detection when a non-VESA mode was chosen as the initial mode. This is a bug. > With the 2.6.20.10/2.6.20.11 configuration, the user did have > CONFIG_FIRMWARE_EDID set. I'm not sure why he changed this for the -mm > testing, but then again I don't understand why it should matter. You're complaining that we didn't query EDID when you *explicitly* asked us not to. This is not a bug! -hpa - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/