On Sun, 11 Feb 2018, Lubomir Rintel wrote:
> On Sat, 2018-02-10 at 19:03 +0100, Lubomir Rintel wrote:
>> Now that drm_do_get_edid() handles override and firmware EDIDs it makes
>> no sense to conditionalize it with a DCC probe. On the contrary -- the
>> overrides are useful
On Sun, 11 Feb 2018, Lubomir Rintel wrote:
> On Sat, 2018-02-10 at 19:03 +0100, Lubomir Rintel wrote:
>> Now that drm_do_get_edid() handles override and firmware EDIDs it makes
>> no sense to conditionalize it with a DCC probe. On the contrary -- the
>> overrides are useful specifically when DCC
On Sat, 2018-02-10 at 19:03 +0100, Lubomir Rintel wrote:
> Now that drm_do_get_edid() handles override and firmware EDIDs it makes
> no sense to conditionalize it with a DCC probe. On the contrary -- the
> overrides are useful specifically when DCC is not functioning.
>
> drm_do_get_edid()
On Sat, 2018-02-10 at 19:03 +0100, Lubomir Rintel wrote:
> Now that drm_do_get_edid() handles override and firmware EDIDs it makes
> no sense to conditionalize it with a DCC probe. On the contrary -- the
> overrides are useful specifically when DCC is not functioning.
>
> drm_do_get_edid()
Now that drm_do_get_edid() handles override and firmware EDIDs it makes
no sense to conditionalize it with a DCC probe. On the contrary -- the
overrides are useful specifically when DCC is not functioning.
drm_do_get_edid() already bails out when DCC fails, there's no need for
an extra check. It
Now that drm_do_get_edid() handles override and firmware EDIDs it makes
no sense to conditionalize it with a DCC probe. On the contrary -- the
overrides are useful specifically when DCC is not functioning.
drm_do_get_edid() already bails out when DCC fails, there's no need for
an extra check. It
6 matches
Mail list logo