On 10/08/2015 05:44 AM, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
On Thu, Oct 08, 2015 at 03:39:26PM +0300, Jani Nikula wrote:
On Thu, 08 Oct 2015, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
On Wed, Oct 07, 2015 at 02:38:29PM -0700, clinton.a.tay...@intel.com wrote:
From: Clint Taylor
The TMDS_296M define was computing as 296704 but
On Thu, Oct 08, 2015 at 03:39:26PM +0300, Jani Nikula wrote:
> On Thu, 08 Oct 2015, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 07, 2015 at 02:38:29PM -0700, clinton.a.tay...@intel.com wrote:
> >> From: Clint Taylor
> >>
> >> The TMDS_296M define was computing as 296704 but the mode->clock is
> >> 2967
On Thu, 08 Oct 2015, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 07, 2015 at 02:38:29PM -0700, clinton.a.tay...@intel.com wrote:
>> From: Clint Taylor
>>
>> The TMDS_296M define was computing as 296704 but the mode->clock is
>> 296700 as defined by EDID. Adjusted define to allow correct detection
>> of t
On Thu, 08 Oct 2015, clinton.a.tay...@intel.com wrote:
> From: Clint Taylor
>
> The TMDS_296M define was computing as 296704 but the mode->clock is
> 296700 as defined by EDID. Adjusted define to allow correct detection
> of the need to program the correct N value for 29.97 and 23.98 refresh
> rat
On Wed, Oct 07, 2015 at 02:38:29PM -0700, clinton.a.tay...@intel.com wrote:
> From: Clint Taylor
>
> The TMDS_296M define was computing as 296704 but the mode->clock is
> 296700 as defined by EDID. Adjusted define to allow correct detection
> of the need to program the correct N value for 29.97 a
From: Clint Taylor
The TMDS_296M define was computing as 296704 but the mode->clock is
296700 as defined by EDID. Adjusted define to allow correct detection
of the need to program the correct N value for 29.97 and 23.98 refresh
rate.
Signed-off-by: Clint Taylor
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_a