On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 6:30 PM, Jiří Paleček <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, 24 Jun 2008 23:21:09 +0200, Alex Deucher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > >> 2008/6/24 Jiri Palecek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >>> >>> Last, would it be possible to make it also consider the maximum >>> pixelclock of >>> the CRT (for example, if you want the maximum pixelclock of the CRT, the >>> algorithm might get a higher frequency)? >> >> The algorithm is limited by the range of clocks that the pll is able >> to produce. Presumably mode validation has culled out any modes that >> the monitor is not able to handle. > > True, but I was thinking about cases where monitor can handle some (upper > limit) frequency, but the pll cannot produce it, and can produce some higher > frequency (which can be the best match). >
Ah, I see, > PS: As I think about it once more, I think the line > > + max_ref_div = 2*max_ref_div - min_ref_div; > > is an error. I added it to ensure the algorithm wouldn't cut the range of > ref_divs if they are all valid, but now I think it's unneeded and > errorneous. Pushed! thanks. Alex
