On Thu, 17 May 2018, "Atwood, Matthew S" <matthew.s.atwood@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, 2018-05-17 at 12:50 +0300, Jani Nikula wrote: >> On Wed, 16 May 2018, Dhinakaran Pandiyan <dhinakaran.pandiyan@intel.c >> om> wrote: >> > Why overwrite all values if this is an expensive operation? From >> > what I >> > can see, you'll need to read only 0000h - 00005h > was mostly future proofing, we can get away with only reading 6 values. > the expense is to read 1, any number after that doesnt cost alot. That > being said sure thing. With the dpcd read, memcmp, memcpy, and debug logging written based on sizeof(dpcd_ext), it'll be trivial to just adjust the size of the local array if needed. >> Surely this is not XXX 1.2? ;) > I found it in a dp1.2 spec that Rodrigo had, I had originally found it > as a change with dp1.3. Earlier versions of the patch that added > DP_TRAINING_AUX_RD_MASK has had dp1.3 until he showed me that. If you'd > like Ill change it. I'm not looking it up now, but please just update the XXX as best you can. BR, Jani. -- Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Graphics Center _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
