On Thu, 08 Apr 2021 16:49:37 +0300 Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Anyway, this is only tangentially related to the library. I just think > we need to take DisplayID better into account also in the *users* of the > library, as they shouldn't really even look at the EDID if the plain > DisplayID is there, per E-DDC 1.3 section 3.1. That makes me wonder what the kernel DRM uAPI for getting a DisplayID block into userspace would be. A new read-only KMS connector property? Which means userspace (e.g. Weston) needs to know to read the new property. If it does that, then it already knows that it should favour DisplayID over EDID, and there is little the library could do to help with that. Unless you think the library should be making DRM ioctls, which doesn't sound good to me. Thanks, pq
Attachment:
pgphggYqtVsmL.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
