[Intel-gfx] please revert 869184a675662bddcdf76c5b95665272facff2b8 ASAP

[Jesse Barnes]

On Tue, 7 Dec 2010 08:32:49 +1000
Dave Airlie <airlied at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Dec 7, 2010 at 4:04 AM, Jesse Barnes <jbarnes at virtuousgeek.org> wrote:
> > On Mon, 29 Nov 2010 20:06:23 +1000
> > Dave Airlie <airlied at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 7:44 PM, Chris Wilson <chris at chris-wilson.co.uk> wrote:
> >> > On Mon, 29 Nov 2010 16:18:44 +1000, Dave Airlie <airlied at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> This commit breaks the eDP panel on the my HP Elitebook 2540p,
> >> >> reverting it brings the panel back to life.
> >> >
> >> > Happy to test the revert just as soon as I work out what the equivalent
> >> > commit is in my tree... ;-)
> >> > -Chris
> >>
> >> oops
> >>
> >> 869184a675662bddcdf76c5b95665272facff2b8
> >>
> >> must have sent the revert commit id locally or something ;-)
> >>
> >> drm/i915/dp: use VBT provided eDP params if available
> >>
> >> Looks like trusting the BIOS is a bad plan, also that commit seems to
> >> do a lot more than just use some VBT values, probably needs more
> >> splitting up from jbarnes.
> >
> > !#$!@!!
> >
> > One day we'll have reliable eDP mode setting, I promise.  Time to
> > harass some more people internally about how to get sane values and
> > whether skipping training is generally safe (assuming we use the right
> > values that is!).
> 
> I suspect you should split that patch also, it did two things, and I
> wasn't sure which one way the one I wanted.

You mean using the VBT values and avoiding the training?  I suppose
those could be split, but for eDP they should amount to the same thing
(but otoh "should" is a big word when talking about eDP).

-- 
Jesse Barnes, Intel Open Source Technology Center