Re: [PATCH] drm/edid: Try harder to fix up base EDID blocks

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]




On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 2:56 PM, Adam Jackson <ajax@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 4/16/12 10:40 AM, Adam Jackson wrote:
>>
>> Requiring the first byte of the EDID base block header to be 0 means we
>> don't fix up as many transfer errors as we could.  Instead have the
>> callers specify whether it's meant to be block 0 or not, and
>> conditionally run header fixup based on that.
>
>
> Anybody?  This appears to be a pretty common form of EDID corruption.

Seems reasonable to me.

Reviewed-by: Alex Deucher <alexdeucher@xxxxxxxxx>

>
> - ajax
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> dri-devel mailing list
> dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel



[Linux Intel Graphics]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Photo]     [Yosemite News]    [Yosemite Photos]    [Video Projectors]     [PDAs]     [Free Online Dating]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86] [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Photo]     [Yosemite News]    [Yosemite Photos]    [Video Projectors]     [PDAs]     [Free Online Dating]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]     [Devices]

Add to Google Powered by Linux