| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-Id: <201004261906.45251.toralf.foerster@gmx.de> Date: Mon, 26 Apr 2010 19:06:44 +0200 From: Toralf Förster <toralf.foerster@....de> To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Cc: "linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org" l <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>, linux-video@...ey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz Subject: should the resoltion of a closed lid of a docked ThinkPad be considered Hello, there's a different behaviour between 2.6.33.3 and 2.6.34-rc5 observed at a ThinkPad T400 with intel graphic GM45 . If it is docked and the lid is closed (1440x900) and an external DVI monitor (1650x1080) is connected at the docking station - the dmesg of 2.6.33.3 gives: Console: switching to colour frame buffer device 210x65 whereas 2.6.34 gives: Console: switching to colour frame buffer device 180x56 Furthermore X differs in the fact, that 2.6.33.3 sets the external monitor to the expected resolution: (II) intel(0): Output HDMI2 using initial mode 1680x1050 whereas 2.6.34-rc5 sets it to the (unwanted) lower resolution : (II) intel(0): Output HDMI2 using initial mode 1440x900 Now I'm wondering whether this new behaviour is wanted - and if not - which mailing list is the correct one ? -- MfG/Sincerely Toralf Förster pgp finger print: 7B1A 07F4 EC82 0F90 D4C2 8936 872A E508 7DB6 9DA3 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists