On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 11:18:46AM -0400, Alexei Podtelezhnikov wrote: > On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 10:45 AM Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > Quoting Alexei Podtelezhnikov (2020-04-27 15:40:42) > > > > > > > > These do not exist. They are fake PCI-ID for Windows95 multi monitor. > > > > The single device appears twice on the bus as a second function. We > > > > never had that restriction and could do multiple monitors on the single > > > > device. > > > > > > Windows 10 drivers list them, they do show up on lspci and I'll quote > > > from Atom datasheet. > > > "This register is unique in Function 1 (the Function 0 DID is > > > separate). This difference in Device ID is necessary for allowing > > > distinct Plug and Play enumeration of function 1 when both function 0 > > > and function 1 have the same class code." > > > Whatever this means. > > > > It means it's a hack for the Window's driver. There is no HW behind it. > > Intel talks about two separate engines (threads?) > https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/support/articles/000005880/graphics-drivers/legacy-graphics.html > https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/support/articles/000005747/graphics-drivers.html > Still not buying? Hi Alexei, thanks for these. With this information in mind it looks very wrong to simply add the PCI ID. ADD2 device is not supported by i915. I don't believe it will be as simple as just adding the PCI ID here. > _______________________________________________ > Intel-gfx mailing list > Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
