On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 1:54 PM, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 8:59 AM, Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On Wed, 22 Dec 2010 17:24:36 +0100, Takashi Iwai <tiwai@xxxxxxx> wrote: >>> The commit 448f53a1ede54eb854d036abf54573281412d650 >>> drm/i915/bios: Reverse order of 100/120 Mhz SSC clocks >>> >>> causes a regression on a SandyBridge machine here. >>> The laptop display (LVDS) becomes blank. Reverting the commit fixes >>> the problem. >> >> The question is whose BIOS is wrong? > > I don't think so. > >> The Lenovo U160's or the >> Sandybridge SDV? And why does it work for that other OS? <Insert >> rhetorical question of the day here.> > > Quite frankly, I don't think the question should *ever* be "whose BIOS > is wrong?" > > You should always take for granted that the BIOS is wrong. It's not a > question of "blame the BIOS", it's a question of facts of life. > > It's 100% pointless to point fingers and say "the HP BIOS is wrong" or > "the Lenovo BIOS is wrong". Buggy BIOSes happen. ALWAYS. Any code that > relies on the BIOS to such a degree that it either works or not based > on it is by definition broken. > > Why does that code need to figure out some LVDS clock from the BIOS? > Why can't the code look at the actual hardware state or similar, since > presumably the screen is on after boot. THAT we can rely on, since a > BIOS that doesn't initialize LVDS is not going to ever ship even as > pre-release. > I've no idea but since this is spread-spectrum related the bios may not enable spread-spectrum on the panel, though really the question is as always, what does Windows do. Dave. > Linus > _______________________________________________ > dri-devel mailing list > dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel > _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
