On Thu, 17 May 2018, "Atwood, Matthew S" <matthew.s.atw...@intel.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 2018-05-17 at 12:50 +0300, Jani Nikula wrote:
>> On Wed, 16 May 2018, Dhinakaran Pandiyan <dhinakaran.pandiyan@intel.c
>> om> wrote:
>> > Why overwrite all values if this is an expensive operation? From
>> > what I
>> > can see, you'll need to read only 0000h - 00005h
> was mostly future proofing, we can get away with only reading 6 values.
> the expense is to read 1, any number after that doesnt cost alot. That
> being said sure thing.

With the dpcd read, memcmp, memcpy, and debug logging written based on
sizeof(dpcd_ext), it'll be trivial to just adjust the size of the local
array if needed.

>> Surely this is not XXX 1.2? ;)
> I found it in a dp1.2 spec that Rodrigo had, I had originally found it
> as a change with dp1.3. Earlier versions of the patch that added
> DP_TRAINING_AUX_RD_MASK has had dp1.3 until he showed me that. If you'd
> like Ill change it.

I'm not looking it up now, but please just update the XXX as best you


Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Graphics Center
Intel-gfx mailing list

Reply via email to