On 11/2/11 1:31 PM, Keith Packard wrote: > On Wed, 02 Nov 2011 13:13:52 -0400, Adam Jackson<ajax at redhat.com> wrote: > >> Given the choice of trusting DPCD or the VBT, I'd definitely prefer >> DPCD. > > Except that the DPCD is coded into the monitor while the VBT is done by > the platform. And, it's the platform which may neglect to connect some > of the wires.
My reasoning about this has been: The maximum link configuration in DPCD is going to fit - and minimally fit - the maximum supported configuration (depth/rate/size/etc), because otherwise the hardware would have been more expensive to produce. The VBT is going to be crap. But as always, "do what the Windows driver does" seems like a good strategy. Do we know? > Any bets on how long until we find a machine that has right value in the > VBT and the wrong one in DPCD? Or a machine with wrong values in both places? I will happily pay $20 to the first person to find a monitor with broken link/lane in DPCD, on the understanding that they take it (the $20) to the nearest hardware store, buy a hammer, and smash the monitor. Preferably with the video uploaded to youtube. - ajax
