On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 01:59:07AM +, James wrote:
> Hello! I know this is an old thread, but i am having this problem on my
> macbook
> air. Ideas for a quick fix?
Upgrade to kernel 3.2 or newer, that has the patch.
-Daniel
--
Daniel Vetter
Mail: dan...@ffwll.ch
Mobile: +41 (0)79 365 57 48
Hello! I know this is an old thread, but i am having this problem on my macbook
air. Ideas for a quick fix?
Thanks,
James
___
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
On Tue, 22 Nov 2011 17:40:25 +0100, Daniel Mack wrote:
> Just curious - is this patch queued somewhere for mainline yet?
I'm waiting for airlied to pull drm-fixes-intel before I push more stuff
there.
--
keith.pack...@intel.com
pgpn9lOMl3zqH.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
On Sun, 20 Nov 2011 12:22:50 +0100, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> So, writing bit-0 caused a problem, as it seems.
Thanks. I've noted that in the patch message.
--
keith.pack...@intel.com
pgpCXCnhRKCYp.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
Intel-gfx mailing l
At Sat, 19 Nov 2011 10:34:12 -0800,
Keith Packard wrote:
>
> [1 ]
> On Sat, 19 Nov 2011 11:05:05 +0100, Takashi Iwai wrote:
>
> > Maybe it'd be better to mention that actually setting bit-0 caused a
> > blank screen on some machines.
>
> Was that caused by *just* setting bit zero? Or was it ca
On Sat, 19 Nov 2011 11:05:05 +0100, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> Maybe it'd be better to mention that actually setting bit-0 caused a
> blank screen on some machines.
Was that caused by *just* setting bit zero? Or was it caused by setting
the duty cycle to 0x, in which case it would be larger than
At Fri, 18 Nov 2011 11:25:48 -0800,
Keith Packard wrote:
>
> On Thu, 17 Nov 2011 17:33:50 +0100, Takashi Iwai wrote:
>
> > If it's only with 915GM, we'll just need to change IS_PINEVEW() to
> > IS_PINEVIEW() || IS_I915GM(). This might be a safer option at this
> > moment unless we check all cas
On Thu, 17 Nov 2011 17:33:50 +0100, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> If it's only with 915GM, we'll just need to change IS_PINEVEW() to
> IS_PINEVIEW() || IS_I915GM(). This might be a safer option at this
> moment unless we check all cases or specs...
I read through the hardware docs yesterday and figured
At Wed, 16 Nov 2011 22:15:41 -0800,
Keith Packard wrote:
>
> On Wed, 16 Nov 2011 18:14:55 +0100, Takashi Iwai wrote:
>
> > While refactoring of backlight control code in commit [a95735569:
> > drm/i915: Refactor panel backlight controls], the handling of the bit
> > 0 of duty-cycle was gone exce
On Wed, 16 Nov 2011 18:14:55 +0100, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> While refactoring of backlight control code in commit [a95735569:
> drm/i915: Refactor panel backlight controls], the handling of the bit
> 0 of duty-cycle was gone except for pineview. This resulted in invalid
> register values for old c
While refactoring of backlight control code in commit [a95735569:
drm/i915: Refactor panel backlight controls], the handling of the bit
0 of duty-cycle was gone except for pineview. This resulted in invalid
register values for old chips like 915GM. When the bit 0 is set, the
backlight is turned o
11 matches
Mail list logo
