On Sat, Oct 8, 2011 at 19:13, Ben Widawsky <b...@bwidawsk.net> wrote:
> I think you may as well optimistically try to get the edid_data here. > The problem is, in the success case you add ~10 i2c clocks because you > next call drm_get_edid. If you optimistacally try to do both you should > receive the -ENXIO after the slaves ignore the address byte, and not > lose time. (So win on exists case, lose a *slight* amount of CPU time in > fail case). > Yep, good idea! I was hoping about that drm_edid patch - it is much smaller, gives slightly better results in all cases, and works with all the cards which use drm. But until I find some non-intel cards to test it (or someone with such cards volunteers to do such testing), I am a bit sceptical about having it merged. -- Eugeni Dodonov <http://eugeni.dodonov.net/>
_______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
