[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <yunobwuuzha.fsf@aiko.keithp.com>
Date: Wed, 02 Nov 2011 11:54:25 -0700
From: Keith Packard <keithp@...thp.com>
To: intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/7] drm/i915: Treat PCH eDP like DP in most places
On Tue, 1 Nov 2011 23:20:26 -0700, Keith Packard <keithp@...thp.com> wrote:
> intel_dp = enc_to_intel_dp(encoder);
> - if (intel_dp->base.type == INTEL_OUTPUT_DISPLAYPORT) {
> + if (intel_dp->base.type == INTEL_OUTPUT_DISPLAYPORT || is_pch_edp(intel_dp)) {
> lane_count = intel_dp->lane_count;
> break;
> - } else if (is_edp(intel_dp)) {
> + } else if (is_cpu_edp(intel_dp)) {
> lane_count = dev_priv->edp.lanes;
> break;
Thinking about this one more time -- if we ever want to use
dev_priv->edp.lanes, we should use it in
intel_dp_max_lane_count. intel_dp_set_m_n should use
intel_dp->lane_count unconditionally as that's the value we've used
everywhere else for mode setting.
Perhaps we should use it for monitors that don't include the
MAX_LANE_COUNT field in the dpcd? Perhaps we should use it on all eDP
monitors?
--
keith.packard@...el.com
Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped
Powered by blists - more mailing lists