On Tue, 13 Nov 2018, Jani Nikula wrote: > On Tue, 06 Nov 2018, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@xxxxxxx> wrote: >> On Mon, 5 Nov 2018 09:48:33 +0100 >> Christoph Niedermaier <cniedermaier@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >>> A problem was found when EDID data sets for displays other than the >>> provided samples were generated. The patch series has no effect on >>> the provided samples that still match the data used in >>> drivers/gpu/drm/drm_edid_load.c. >>> The provided samples use small values for XOFFSET, XPULSE, YOFFSET >>> and YPULSE, where the error doesn't occur. This fix corrects the use >>> of that values in case of high values, because the most significant >>> bits were treated incorrectly. >>> >>> The previous version made it necessary to first generate an EDID data >>> set without correct CRC and then to fix the CRC in a second step. >>> This patch series adds the CRC calculation to the makefile in such a >>> way that a correct EDID data set is generated in a single build step. >> >> This seems reasonable, I guess; I've applied both. It seems to me, >> though, that this stuff is in the wrong place. Perhaps we should go >> one step further and move it to tools/ ? > > And then the next step further would be to write a tool in a high level language to generate the data rather than assemble the binary. Such a tool would, of course, catch errors like the ones fixed by this patch. It would be nice, but for now it works. Speaking for me such a task has low priority, because in my opinion this code is not often used and it is more intended for documentation purpose. Best regards, Christoph
