On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 03:32:41PM +0200, Jani Nikula wrote: > On Tue, 29 Oct 2019, Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > From: Thierry Reding <treding@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > The current link status contains bytes 0x202 through 0x207, but we also > > want to make sure to include the DP_ADJUST_REQUEST_POST_CURSOR2 (0x20c) > > so that the post-cursor adjustment can be queried during link training. > > We don't currently use this in i915 (we probably should), so the impact > here is that we'll just read more DPCD than before. I quickly perused > i915, and this does not appear to directly break anything. I think the > change is probably fine, but at the same time it freaks me out a bit... > > If you don't mind, please resend this with Cc: > intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx to have our CI crunch through it across > a number of platforms. Would give me a warm fuzzy feeling. :) > > With the caveat that I didn't look at any other drivers besides i915, > > Reviewed-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@xxxxxxxxx> Done, thanks. Thierry
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
