On Wed, 7 Dec 2011 16:20:41 -0800, Simon Que s...@chromium.org wrote:
The operations when setting dpms on should be in the order opposite
of what's done when setting dpms off.
This is because of potentially conflicting effects:
~ drmModeConnectoSetProperty() enables/disables the backlight
From: Paulo Zanoni paulo.r.zan...@intel.com
We use struct intel_sdvo_dtd for that too.
Bugzilla: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15766
Bugzilla: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=42174
Bugzilla: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4
Signed-off-by: Paulo
On Thu, 8 Dec 2011 13:41:53 -0200, przan...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Paulo Zanoni paulo.r.zan...@intel.com
We use struct intel_sdvo_dtd for that too.
Bugzilla: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15766
Bugzilla: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=42174
Bugzilla:
On Thu, 08 Dec 2011 14:10:06 +, Chris Wilson ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk
wrote:
I had to remind myself why both the driver and the kernel are both
touching the backlight across DPMS; the answer as I see it is that the
kernel only knows about the raw backlight interface whereas the driver
On Thu, 08 Dec 2011 08:35:12 -0800, Keith Packard kei...@keithp.com wrote:
On Thu, 08 Dec 2011 14:10:06 +, Chris Wilson ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk
wrote:
I had to remind myself why both the driver and the kernel are both
touching the backlight across DPMS; the answer as I see it is that
On Wed, 7 Dec 2011 13:03:29 -0800, Jesse Barnes jbar...@virtuousgeek.org
wrote:
On Wed, 07 Dec 2011 12:54:07 -0800
Eric Anholt e...@anholt.net wrote:
On Wed, 7 Dec 2011 11:58:05 -0800, Jesse Barnes jbar...@virtuousgeek.org
wrote:
On Wed, 7 Dec 2011 10:38:41 -0800
Jesse Barnes
On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 12:43 PM, Ben Widawsky b...@bwidawsk.net wrote:
On Tue, Dec 06, 2011 at 12:12:33PM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote:
The recursion loop goes retire_requests-unbind-gpu_idle-retire_reqeusts.
Every time we go through this we need a
- active object that can be retired
- and
