On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 02:46:19PM -0300, Paulo Zanoni wrote:
> Hi
>
> 2012/9/6 Daniel Vetter :
> > With the previous patch to clean up where exactly these two functions
> > are getting called, this patch can tackle the enable/disable code
> > itself:
>
> This is the kind of patch that's hard to
On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 02:46:19PM -0300, Paulo Zanoni wrote:
> Hi
>
> 2012/9/6 Daniel Vetter :
> > With the previous patch to clean up where exactly these two functions
> > are getting called, this patch can tackle the enable/disable code
> > itself:
>
> This is the kind of patch that's hard to
Hi
2012/9/6 Daniel Vetter :
> With the previous patch to clean up where exactly these two functions
> are getting called, this patch can tackle the enable/disable code
> itself:
This is the kind of patch that's hard to proof-read. Basically, IMHO,
the intel_dp->DP variable makes things harder to
With the previous patch to clean up where exactly these two functions
are getting called, this patch can tackle the enable/disable code
itself:
- WARN if the port enable bit is in the wrong state or if the edp pll
bit is in the wrong state, just for paranoia's sake.
- Don't disable the edp pll h
