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

On Mon, 16 Apr 2012 10:40:08 -0400, 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 ba

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

On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 2:56 PM, Adam Jackson 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 o

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

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. An

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

On Mon, 16 Apr 2012 10:40:08 -0400, 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 ba

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

On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 2:56 PM, Adam Jackson 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 o

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

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

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

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. Bugzilla: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/812890 Signed

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

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. Bugzilla: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/812890 Signed