| 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: Sat, 30 Jun 2012 21:24:55 +0200
From: Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de>
To: Adam Jackson <ajax@...hat.com>
Cc: Sven Joachim <svenjoac@....de>, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
Calvin Owens <jcalvinowens@...il.com>,
Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@...el.com>,
Dave Airlie <airlied@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Bogus video resolution in Linux 3.5-rc4
At Sat, 30 Jun 2012 13:46:54 -0500,
Calvin Owens wrote:
>
> On 06/26/2012 02:21 AM, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> > At Mon, 25 Jun 2012 21:38:56 +0200,
> > Sven Joachim wrote:
> >>
> >> Am 25.06.2012 um 21:24 schrieb Takashi Iwai:
> >>
> >>>>> And, does the patch below help?
> >>>>
> >>>> Somewhat: at least I get 1280x1024 again, but at 60 rather than 75 Hz.
> >>>
> >>> I guess it worked casually because 1280x1024@75 was the highest
> >>> resolution / rate, so it was picked up as the preferred mode...
> >>
> >> Quite possible. Problem is that 1280x1024@60 looks worse, so I'd like
> >> to get the 75 Hz back.
> >>
> >>>> The xrandr command shows various bogus modes.
> >>>
> >>> Can't these values be displayed on your monitor at all?
> >>
> >> It's a TFT LCD with 1280x1024 pixels.
> >
> > Yes, but displaying higher resolutions wasn't too uncommon in the
> > earlier VGA days. So, this doesn't mean the higher modes are
> > "bogus" as long they are in the range the monitor itself advertises.
> >
> > On the second thought, if there are many such broken monitors, it
> > might be safer to exclude the inferred modes with higher resolutions.
> >
> > The original problem was that the resolution like 1366x768 or 1600x900
> > doesn't appear in the mode list. These are supposed to be lower than
> > the native. Restricting the higher resolutions won't regress for
> > these problems.
> >
> > The patch below is a quick fix.
> >
> >
> > Takashi
> >
> > ---
> > From: Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de>
> > Subject: [PATCH] drm: edid: Don't add inferred modes with higher resolution
> >
> > When a monitor EDID doesn't give the preferred bit, driver assumes
> > that the mode with the higest resolution and rate is the preferred
> > mode. Meanwhile the recent changes for allowing more modes in the
> > GFT/CVT ranges give actually more modes, and some modes may be over
> > the native size. Thus such a mode would be picked up as the preferred
> > mode although it's no native resolution.
> >
> > For avoiding such a problem, this patch limits the addition of
> > inferred modes by checking not to be greater than other modes.
> > Also, it checks the duplicated mode entry at the same time.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de>
> > ---
> > drivers/gpu/drm/drm_edid.c | 27 ++++++++++++++++++++++++---
> > 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_edid.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_edid.c
> > index 5873e48..a8743c3 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_edid.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_edid.c
> > @@ -1039,6 +1039,24 @@ mode_in_range(const struct drm_display_mode *mode, struct edid *edid,
> > return true;
> > }
> >
> > +static bool valid_inferred_mode(const struct drm_connector *connector,
> > + const struct drm_display_mode *mode)
> > +{
> > + struct drm_display_mode *m;
> > + bool ok = false;
> > +
> > + list_for_each_entry(m, &connector->probed_modes, head) {
> > + if (mode->hdisplay == m->hdisplay &&
> > + mode->vdisplay == m->vdisplay &&
> > + drm_mode_vrefresh(mode) == drm_mode_vrefresh(m))
> > + return false; /* duplicated */
> > + if (mode->hdisplay <= m->hdisplay &&
> > + mode->vdisplay <= m->vdisplay)
> > + ok = true;
> > + }
> > + return ok;
> > +}
> > +
> > static int
> > drm_dmt_modes_for_range(struct drm_connector *connector, struct edid *edid,
> > struct detailed_timing *timing)
> > @@ -1048,7 +1066,8 @@ drm_dmt_modes_for_range(struct drm_connector *connector, struct edid *edid,
> > struct drm_device *dev = connector->dev;
> >
> > for (i = 0; i < drm_num_dmt_modes; i++) {
> > - if (mode_in_range(drm_dmt_modes + i, edid, timing)) {
> > + if (mode_in_range(drm_dmt_modes + i, edid, timing) &&
> > + valid_inferred_mode(connector, drm_dmt_modes + i)) {
> > newmode = drm_mode_duplicate(dev, &drm_dmt_modes[i]);
> > if (newmode) {
> > drm_mode_probed_add(connector, newmode);
> > @@ -1088,7 +1107,8 @@ drm_gtf_modes_for_range(struct drm_connector *connector, struct edid *edid,
> > return modes;
> >
> > fixup_mode_1366x768(newmode);
> > - if (!mode_in_range(newmode, edid, timing)) {
> > + if (!mode_in_range(newmode, edid, timing) ||
> > + !valid_inferred_mode(connector, newmode)) {
> > drm_mode_destroy(dev, newmode);
> > continue;
> > }
> > @@ -1116,7 +1136,8 @@ drm_cvt_modes_for_range(struct drm_connector *connector, struct edid *edid,
> > return modes;
> >
> > fixup_mode_1366x768(newmode);
> > - if (!mode_in_range(newmode, edid, timing)) {
> > + if (!mode_in_range(newmode, edid, timing) ||
> > + !valid_inferred_mode(connector, newmode)) {
> > drm_mode_destroy(dev, newmode);
> > continue;
> > }
>
> Hello all,
>
> I had the exact same problem as Sven, bisected to cb21aafe121b1c3ad4c77cc5c22320163f16ba42.
> Takashi's patch (supra) fixes the issue for me.
OK, so there can be more people hit by this issue.
Adam, what do you think? My patch is acceptable?
thanks,
Takashi
--
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