On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 11:36:07AM +0530, Sivakumar Thulasimani wrote:
> Hi Daniel,
> any comments for the patch below ?
Find me a reviewer to r-b stamp this patch and I'll merge.
-Daniel
>
> regards,
> Sivakumar
>
> On Friday 07 August 2015 03:14 PM, Sivakumar Thulasimani wrote:
> >From: "Thulasimani,Sivakumar" <sivakumar.thulasimani@xxxxxxxxx>
> >
> >DP spec requires the checksum of the last block read to be written
> >when replying to TEST_EDID_READ. This patch fixes the current code
> >to do the same.
> >
> >v2: removed loop for jumping blocks and performed direct addition
> >as recommended by Daniel
> >
> >Signed-off-by: Sivakumar Thulasimani <sivakumar.thulasimani@xxxxxxxxx>
> >---
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c | 9 ++++++++-
> > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> >diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c
> >index f1b9f93..fa6e202 100644
> >--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c
> >+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c
> >@@ -4090,9 +4090,16 @@ static uint8_t intel_dp_autotest_edid(struct intel_dp *intel_dp)
> > intel_dp->aux.i2c_defer_count);
> > intel_dp->compliance_test_data = INTEL_DP_RESOLUTION_FAILSAFE;
> > } else {
> >+ struct edid *block = intel_connector->detect_edid;
> >+
> >+ /* We have to write the checksum
> >+ * of the last block read
> >+ */
> >+ block += intel_connector->detect_edid->extensions;
> >+
> > if (!drm_dp_dpcd_write(&intel_dp->aux,
> > DP_TEST_EDID_CHECKSUM,
> >- &intel_connector->detect_edid->checksum,
> >+ &block->checksum,
> > 1))
> > DRM_DEBUG_KMS("Failed to write EDID checksum\n");
>
--
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
