[Intel-gfx] possible quirks addition

[Adam Jackson]

On Tue, 2009-10-20 at 01:25 +0000, The Fungi wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 03:03:35PM -0400, Adam Jackson wrote:
> > Those should be new enough to get the extended EDID blocks. The
> > kernel support could be broken, I suppose. Do you get a fuller
> > EDID block in RANDR when running UMS?
> 
> Interestingly, I do... Here's after booting without KMS enabled:

Awesome, the kernel DDC code is broken.  It looks like it was written
without even a cursory glance at the X code.  X will try to read 128
bytes at a time and will do the right thing for segment selection when
there's more than 256 bytes; the kernel code appears to try for the
whole 256 at once and is completely ignorant of segments.

I'll cook up a patch for that.

> > That's pretty awesome. I repeat what I said earlier about TVs being
> > hateful though.
> 
> I won't even go into the hoops I used to jump through getting X to
> use this display with other drivers in years past. Suffice to say
> this is a breath of fresh air by comparison.

Thanks!   Getting EDID right has become sort of a crusade for me.

- ajax
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/intel-gfx/attachments/20091020/105f0262/attachment.sig>