[PATCH 0/3] [Karmic] UBUNTU: [Upstream] (drop after 2.6.31) drm/mode: get the modeline for standard timing in EDID by using CVT/GTF

Tim Gardner tim.gardner at canonical.com
Wed Sep 2 18:33:34 BST 2009


Leann Ogasawara wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-09-02 at 10:52 -0600, Tim Gardner wrote:
>> Leann Ogasawara wrote:
>>> Hi All,
>>>
>>> http://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/398188
>>>
>>> Without the following set of patches, xrandr lists a mode with no
>>> resolution nor hsync.  The patches are already in Dave Arlie's
>>> drm-2.6/drm-next branch.  They unfortunately do not appear they'll hit
>>> 2.6.31.  Karmic test kernels built with these patches had positive
>>> feedback.  Please consider carrying until merged upstream.
>>>
>>> The following changes since commit
>>> 78aa652bf02b905c9fd2ed4360e4ed48066a6057:
>>>   Tim Gardner (1):
>>>         UBUNTU: [Config] CONFIG_SATA_VIA=m
>>>
>>> are available in the git repository at:
>>>
>>>   git://kernel.ubuntu.com/ogasawara/ubuntu-karmic.git lp398188
>>>
>>> Leann Ogasawara (1):
>>>       UBUNTU: [Upstream] (drop after 2.6.31) drm/mode: get the modeline
>>> for standard timing in EDID by using CVT/GTF
>>>
>>> Zhao Yakui (2):
>>>       UBUNTU: [Upstream] (drop after 2.6.31) drm/mode: add the CVT
>>> algorithm in kernel space
>>>       UBUNTU: [Upstream] (drop after 2.6.31) drm/mode: add the GTF
>>> algorithm in kernel space
>>>
>>>  drivers/gpu/drm/drm_edid.c  |   66 ++++++-
>>>  drivers/gpu/drm/drm_modes.c |  416
>>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>  include/drm/drm_crtc.h      |    6 +
>>>  3 files changed, 479 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> What is the downside of _not_ applying these patches? Is there something 
>> more egregious then displaying a bogus mode? Its not obvious to me from 
>> the bug report that these mammoth patches are worth it.
> 
>>From what I see these mainly just prevent the bogus mode from
> displaying.  I'd consider it a low priority so understand if you'd
> rather wait for Karmic+1 when we'll likely get these automatically.
> 
> Thanks,
> Leann
> 

Good, I would rather _not_ carry these patches at this late stage in the 
release cycle. Consider yourself NACK'd :)

rtg
-- 
Tim Gardner tim.gardner at canonical.com



More information about the kernel-team mailing list