On Sat, 2010-08-28 at 22:13 +0200, Paul Menzel wrote: > Am Montag, den 23.08.2010, 10:19 -0400 schrieb Adam Jackson: > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_modes.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_modes.c > > index f1f473e..949326d 100644 > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_modes.c > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_modes.c > > @@ -251,7 +251,10 @@ struct drm_display_mode *drm_cvt_mode(struct drm_device *dev, int hdisplay, > > drm_mode->htotal = drm_mode->hdisplay + CVT_RB_H_BLANK; > > /* Fill in HSync values */ > > drm_mode->hsync_end = drm_mode->hdisplay + CVT_RB_H_BLANK / 2; > > - drm_mode->hsync_start = drm_mode->hsync_end = CVT_RB_H_SYNC; > > + drm_mode->hsync_start = drm_mode->hsync_end - CVT_RB_H_SYNC; > > + /* Fill in VSync values */ > > + drm_mode->vsync_start = drm_mode->vdisplay + CVT_RB_VFPORCH; > > + drm_mode->vsync_end = drm_mode->vsync_start + vsync; > > } > > /* 15/13. Find pixel clock frequency (kHz for xf86) */ > > drm_mode->clock = drm_mode->htotal * HV_FACTOR * 1000 / hperiod; > > Do you know if that was an regression in libdrm Well it's a change to a kernel source file, so, no. > and if that patch might > also fix #26294 [1]? DebPkg:libdrm2 was upgraded during that time from > 2.4.14 too. It might. - ajax
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
