Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 1/2] drm/i915: set interlaced bits for TRANSCONF

2012-02-10 Thread Daniel Vetter
On Wed, Feb 08, 2012 at 02:53:32PM -0800, Jesse Barnes wrote: > On Fri, 3 Feb 2012 17:47:15 -0200 > Paulo Zanoni wrote: > > > From: Paulo Zanoni > > > > I'm not sure why they are needed (I didn't notice any difference in my > > tests), but these bits are in our documentation and they are also

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 1/2] drm/i915: set interlaced bits for TRANSCONF

2012-02-08 Thread Daniel Vetter
On Wed, Feb 08, 2012 at 02:53:32PM -0800, Jesse Barnes wrote: > On Fri, 3 Feb 2012 17:47:15 -0200 > Paulo Zanoni wrote: > > > From: Paulo Zanoni > > > > I'm not sure why they are needed (I didn't notice any difference in my > > tests), but these bits are in our documentation and they are also

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 1/2] drm/i915: set interlaced bits for TRANSCONF

2012-02-08 Thread Jesse Barnes
On Fri, 3 Feb 2012 17:47:15 -0200 Paulo Zanoni wrote: > From: Paulo Zanoni > > I'm not sure why they are needed (I didn't notice any difference in my > tests), but these bits are in our documentation and they are also set by > the Windows driver. > > Signed-off-by: Paulo Zanoni > --- This m

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 1/2] drm/i915: set interlaced bits for TRANSCONF

2012-02-08 Thread Jesse Barnes
On Fri, 3 Feb 2012 17:47:15 -0200 Paulo Zanoni wrote: > From: Paulo Zanoni > > I'm not sure why they are needed (I didn't notice any difference in my > tests), but these bits are in our documentation and they are also set by > the Windows driver. > > Signed-off-by: Paulo Zanoni > --- Do we

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 1/2] drm/i915: set interlaced bits for TRANSCONF

2012-02-03 Thread Paulo Zanoni
From: Paulo Zanoni I'm not sure why they are needed (I didn't notice any difference in my tests), but these bits are in our documentation and they are also set by the Windows driver. Signed-off-by: Paulo Zanoni --- drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_reg.h |2 ++ drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_disp