On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 01:02:59PM -0500, Adam Jackson wrote: > On Thu, 2015-11-26 at 19:01 +0200, Ville Syrjälä wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 09:05:12PM +0200, ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > > > From: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > Rather than using drm_match_cea_mode() to see if the EDID detailed > > > timings are supposed to represent one of the CEA/HDMI modes, add a > > > special version of that function that takes in an explicit clock > > > tolerance value (in kHz). When looking at the detailed timings specify > > > the tolerance as 5kHz due to the 10kHz clock resolution limit inherent > > > in detailed timings. > > > > > > drm_match_cea_mode() uses the normal KHZ2PICOS() matching of clocks, > > > which only allows smaller errors for lower clocks (eg. for 25200 it > > > won't allow any error) and a bigger error for higher clocks (eg. for > > > 297000 it actually matches 296913-297000). So it doesn't really match > > > what we want for the fixup. Using the explicit +-5kHz is much better > > > for this use case. > > > > > > Not sure if we should change the normal mode matching to also use > > > something else besides KHZ2PICOS() since it allows a different > > > proportion of error depending on the clock. I believe VESA CVT > > > allows a maximum deviation of .5%, so using that for normal mode > > > matching might be a good idea? > > > > Ping. Any thoughts from anyone? > > Reviewed-by: Adam Jackson <ajax@xxxxxxxxxx> Applied to drm-misc, thanks for patch&review. -Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation http://blog.ffwll.ch _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
