On 10/11/11 12:16 PM, Jesse Barnes wrote:
On Tue, 11 Oct 2011 10:10:24 -0400 Adam Jackson<a...@redhat.com> wrote:
It still seems entirely magical and probably wrong in some situations.
And I'm thrilled to see that PPT is functionally different from CPT
(seriously, stop doing that) instead of just moving bit definitions
around (seriously, stop doing that). But this change is massively
better than before.
Without composite sync, FDI needs frame/line sync (the fsync/lsync
mentioned in the docs), which means extra wires between the CPU and
PCH. Some boards don't have these and so we need to use composite.
For the same reason, if FDI B and C are sharing lanes, we need to use
composite or we won't have enough lines to go around.
I've asked the hardware guys whether using composite on a board that
supports fsync/lsync is ok generally; if so just defaulting to that
everywhere should be fine.
Makes sense. If true this seems worth doing for CPT too. The IBX docs
don't make any mention of composite sync.
- ajax
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
