<html> <head> <base href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/"> </head> <body> <div> <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_ASSIGNED " title="ASSIGNED - [GLK] no signal after switch resolution from 1080p@23.98" href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=105887#c76">Comment # 76</a> on <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_ASSIGNED " title="ASSIGNED - [GLK] no signal after switch resolution from 1080p@23.98" href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=105887">bug 105887</a> from <a class="email" href="mailto:shashank.sharma@intel.com" title="shashank.sharma@intel.com <shashank.sharma@intel.com>"> shashank.sharma@intel.com</a> <pre>(In reply to Clinton Taylor from <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=105887#c75">comment #75</a>) > (In reply to <a href="mailto:shashank.sharma@intel.com">shashank.sharma@intel.com</a> from <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=105887#c74">comment #74</a>) > > Well, I could not relate that, as there are few parallel thread. Also I > > don't understand why we need a HDMI 2.0 retimer on GLK as it already has a > > HDMI 2.0 native controller, unless someone needs 2 or 3 HDMI 2.0 sources > > coming out of GLK NUC, and NUC was short of it, and some platform team > > decided to use some Paradetech dongle to convert DP 1.2 -> HDMI 2.0. > > > > The ITE66317 retimer implementation does seem to be causing the Linux driver > some difficulty. Based on what I have seen so far, the Linux driver doesn't > wait long enough during mode changes for the retimer to sync correctly to > the new faster clock. If that's the case, in order to upstream this kind of solution in driver, we need to: - detect if this is the specific device with re-timer, because a general purpose wait in encoder path wont be acceptable, in driver. - we need the official sepc indicating this encoder needs this range of timing delay for these pixel clock rates. - Shashank</pre> </div> <hr> You are receiving this mail because: <ul> <li>You are the QA Contact for the bug.</li> <li>You are on the CC list for the bug.</li> </ul> </body> </html>