At Fri, 13 Apr 2012 10:55:16 -0400, Adam Jackson wrote: > > On 4/13/12 10:29 AM, Takashi Iwai wrote: > > At Fri, 13 Apr 2012 10:14:46 -0400, > > Adam Jackson wrote: > >> Yeah, that's a bug. That's why I said it should be renamed > >> drm_dmt_modes_for_range and run unconditionally if we find a range > >> descriptor. > > > > Yeah, I saw your patches. Should the further work base on them? > > Would be nice. > > > Yesterday I've read a news reporting that 1366x768 is the most > > commonly used panel now, more than 1024x768. And, 1600x900 is in the > > second place of the modern laptop panels. > > > > Windows and others do work with these resolutions on the same > > monitor. Why Linux driver can't? Everbody (but developers) thinks > > like that way. > > I think you're trying to make me defend a position I wasn't taking... Heh, don't take it offensive. > >> If it's not the native panel size and it's not a commonly found size in > >> the wild, why are we obligated to provide them for every user? Remember > >> that userspace has the ability to hand in modes from above. > > > > I don't think we need to support all wild modes, too. But the _very_ > > common modes like 1366x768 and 1600x900 should be really supported as > > default. > > I'm not disagreeing. I think common sizes should be available, and we > have code already that's intended to do that. OK. > My issue with the list in the patch is it contains some nonsense. If > some of those more weird-looking sizes _do_ exist in the wild they > should be already present in EDID as the native size. For panels where > they're not native I have difficulty imagining anyone wanting to set > that mode intentionally. And for someone who really does want it they > have the ability to pass in arbitrary crap from userspace anyway. > > 1600x900 is reasonable to add to an "extras" list, because it is > actually common despite not being in DMT. I'm even willing to take > Windows as the example for what modes should be in the extras list. But > I'm not willing to take "I wish this was in a preset list" as the sole > justification. I agree with your point, too. When I worked on supporting these modes in X server side, I didn't pick up all such modes but only really de facto standard ones. It should suffice for most demands, indeed. Also, we don't have to add always 1600x900 or 1366x768. Such a mode is necessary basically only when the laptop panel resolution isn't found in the mode list. We may add it selectively, too. thanks, Takashi _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
