| 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
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 8 Aug 2011 13:01:28 -0700 From: Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org> To: Keith Packard <keithp@...thp.com> Cc: Dave Airlie <airlied@...hat.com>, intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 2/4] drm/i915: Leave LVDS registers unlocked On Mon, 08 Aug 2011 12:53:31 -0700 Keith Packard <keithp@...thp.com> wrote: > On Mon, 8 Aug 2011 11:49:54 -0700, Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org> wrote: > > > Yep, it's safe and possible to do on pre-PCH as well. For panel > > fitting we do need to do an actual power cycle when going from > > non-native back to native iirc, but we can still leave them unlocked so > > we don't have to worry about the lock/unlock sequence everywhere. > > Hidden in the unlock patch was a call to intel_lvds_disable from > intel_lvds_prepare -- that *always* turns off the LVDS for mode > setting. Do we care enough about LVDS mode setting performance that we > should try leave the optimization in place that doesn't turn off the > backlight when switching between modes? We hate flicker right? But generally yes it's safer to just turn it off all the time. -- Jesse Barnes, Intel Open Source Technology Center -- 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