Re: Enhancing EDID quirk functionality

2012-08-09 Thread Ian Pilcher
Well, it took me 4 months to find the time, but I finally had a crack addressing the ideas you mentioned in your last response. I believe that the patch in the following note does everything that you wanted, and hopefully it's all straightforward enough that it doesn't require a lot of explanation

Re: Enhancing EDID quirk functionality

2012-05-07 Thread Adam Jackson
On Mon, 2012-05-07 at 14:50 -0500, Ian Pilcher wrote: > On 05/03/2012 02:42 PM, Adam Jackson wrote: > > I'd like to see documentation for the bit values of the quirks as well. > > And, ideally, this would also have some runtime API for manipulating the > > quirk list, so that way you can test new q

Re: Enhancing EDID quirk functionality

2012-05-07 Thread Ian Pilcher
On 05/03/2012 02:42 PM, Adam Jackson wrote: > This looks good, thank you for taking it on. It was either that or give up on my big display, so ... you're welcome. > I'd like to see documentation for the bit values of the quirks as well. > And, ideally, this would also have some runtime API for ma

Re: Enhancing EDID quirk functionality

2012-05-03 Thread Adam Jackson
On 5/3/12 2:01 PM, Ian Pilcher wrote: The patch does the following: This looks good, thank you for taking it on. * Changes the vendor field of struct edid_quirk to an array, rather than a pointer. (This has already been sent to the dri-devel list.) * Adds two new quirks EDID_QUIRK_DISABL

Re: Enhancing EDID quirk functionality

2012-05-03 Thread Ian Pilcher
I just attached this patch to https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=806091, along with the following comments: This is the "first draft" of an EDID quirk-based approach to solving this problem. I intend to perform a bit of cleanup and break it up into a series of separate patches, but I'm p

Re: Enhancing EDID quirk functionality

2012-04-24 Thread Ian Pilcher
On 04/24/2012 04:07 AM, Lars-Peter Clausen wrote: I just had a similar issue with a different driver and remembered your post If the S bits in the infoframe are 0 the display may under- or overscan the the image (Although the spec says it should behave the same if no infoframe is present). If it

Re: Enhancing EDID quirk functionality

2012-04-24 Thread Lars-Peter Clausen
On 04/19/2012 09:16 PM, Ian Pilcher wrote: > Greetings all! > > I recently discovered that my nice 1900x1200 display is horribly > confused by the InfoFrame functionality that was added to the nouveau > driver in Linux 3.3. Additional testing has shown that it has the same > problem with the i915