On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 10:29 PM, Adam Jackson <ajax at redhat.com> wrote: > On 10/15/12 2:51 PM, Paulo Zanoni wrote: > >> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c >> b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c >> index f48986b9..ba40aa7 100644 >> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c >> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c >> @@ -5356,7 +5356,8 @@ static int haswell_crtc_mode_set(struct drm_crtc >> *crtc, >> >> intel_set_pipe_timings(intel_crtc, mode, adjusted_mode); >> >> - ironlake_set_m_n(crtc, mode, adjusted_mode); >> + if (!(is_dp && !is_cpu_edp)) >> + ironlake_set_m_n(crtc, mode, adjusted_mode); > > > The double-negation here hurts my brain. I think this would be clearer and > equivalent phrased positively: > > if (!is_dp || is_pch_edp) > ironlake_set_m_n(crtc, mode, adjusted_mode); pch_edp doesn't really exist (since nothing much is still on the pch, only the vga port is left), so not really clearer. I suspect we actually want a !is_dp check in there - since the eDP enabling is later in the series all edp checks don't really matter anyway. -Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation +41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch
