On Tue, 15 Nov 2022 19:27:20 +0800, Pin-yen Lin wrote:
> Add caching when EDID is read, and invalidate the cache until the
> bridge detects HPD low or sink count changes on HPD_IRQ.
>
> It takes 1.2s for IT6505 bridge to read a 3-block EDID, and skipping
> one EDID read would be a notable differen
On Thu, 15 Dec 2022 at 09:36, Pin-yen Lin wrote:
>
> Hi Robert,
>
> Thanks for the review.
>
> I didn't see this patch on drm-misc-next, but my another patch merged
> instead:
> https://cgit.freedesktop.org/drm/drm-misc/commit/?id=5eb9a4314053bda7642643f70f49a2b415920812
>
> Did something go wron
Hi Robert,
Thanks for the review.
I didn't see this patch on drm-misc-next, but my another patch merged
instead:
https://cgit.freedesktop.org/drm/drm-misc/commit/?id=5eb9a4314053bda7642643f70f49a2b415920812
Did something go wrong? Or is it me missing something?
Regards,
Pin-yen
On Thu, Dec 15
On Tue, 15 Nov 2022 19:27:20 +0800, Pin-yen Lin wrote:
> Add caching when EDID is read, and invalidate the cache until the
> bridge detects HPD low or sink count changes on HPD_IRQ.
>
> It takes 1.2s for IT6505 bridge to read a 3-block EDID, and skipping
> one EDID read would be a notable differen
On Tue, 15 Nov 2022 at 12:27, Pin-yen Lin wrote:
>
> Add caching when EDID is read, and invalidate the cache until the
> bridge detects HPD low or sink count changes on HPD_IRQ.
>
> It takes 1.2s for IT6505 bridge to read a 3-block EDID, and skipping
> one EDID read would be a notable difference o
Add caching when EDID is read, and invalidate the cache until the
bridge detects HPD low or sink count changes on HPD_IRQ.
It takes 1.2s for IT6505 bridge to read a 3-block EDID, and skipping
one EDID read would be a notable difference on user experience.
Signed-off-by: Pin-yen Lin
---
driver
