RandR future proposals

Keith Packard keithp at keithp.com
Mon Feb 19 00:07:53 PST 2007

On Mon, 2007-02-19 at 18:09 +1100, Graeme Gill wrote:

> It would be good if that were so, but the impression I get from
> the discussions around ddccontrol seem to hint that each monitor
> needs a slightly different control set (ie. ddccontrol has database
> to encapsulate such differences and allow for new monitors), and
> I suspect things like loading the LCD video luts is outside
> the VESA spec., and hence may well be different for each vendor.

Sure, we need monitor-specific implementations of much of this; is there
some reason to prefer a place outside of the X server? We're already
starting to capture monitor-specific quirks related to EDID data which
the X server must be able to process; surely we should work to
centralize such data in a single project. If ddccontrol has created a
database format, it's quite possible we can just adopt that, and perhaps
even add our existing quirk data to it.

> If this is the situation, then it might be better if RandR just
> provided the mechanism to access DDC/CI, and left all the monitor
> specific stuff up to another layer ?

Given the potential for abuse, I'd really like to avoid opening up an
uninterpreted I2C channel from clients to the monitor; is there some
piece of ddccontrol which is not appropriately exposed as a RandR output

keith.packard at intel.com
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg/attachments/20070219/30dedf41/attachment.pgp>

More information about the xorg mailing list