On Thu, 2024-10-10 at 16:54 +0100, Isaac Scott wrote:
To be clear, my reply applies to the patch referenced by [1]
Tested-by: Isaac Scott
> On Thu, 2024-10-10 at 13:31 +0800, Liu Ying wrote:
> > On 10/09/2024, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > > On 10/8/24 12:07 PM, Isaac Scott wro
On Thu, 2024-10-10 at 13:31 +0800, Liu Ying wrote:
> On 10/09/2024, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > On 10/8/24 12:07 PM, Isaac Scott wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2024-10-07 at 20:06 +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > > > On 10/7/24 7:01 PM, Isaac Scott wrote:
> >
On Wed, 2024-10-09 at 17:47 +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> On 10/9/24 11:55 AM, Isaac Scott wrote:
> > On Tue, 2024-10-08 at 23:48 +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > > On 10/8/24 12:07 PM, Isaac Scott wrote:
> > > > On Mon, 2024-10-07 at 20:06 +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
>
On Tue, 2024-10-08 at 23:48 +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> On 10/8/24 12:07 PM, Isaac Scott wrote:
> > On Mon, 2024-10-07 at 20:06 +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > > On 10/7/24 7:01 PM, Isaac Scott wrote:
> > > > Hi Marek,
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
t; clock is then 497.7 MHz:
Awesome! Thank you for this, this seems to fix the regression and the
patches work as expected. I have tested both patches on v6.12-rc2 and
the display works well.
For both patches,
Tested-by: Isaac Scott
>
> video_pll1_ref_sel
Hi Marek,
On Sat, 2024-07-06 at 02:16 +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> On 6/24/24 11:19 AM, Alexander Stein wrote:
> > Am Freitag, 31. Mai 2024, 22:27:21 CEST schrieb Marek Vasut:
> > > In case an upstream bridge modified the required clock frequency
> > > in its .atomic_check callback by setting adjus
