> -----Original Message-----
> From: Nikula, Jani <[email protected]>
> Sent: 24 February 2026 18:47
> To: Srinivas, Vidya <[email protected]>;
> [email protected]
> Cc: [email protected]; Lee, Shawn C <[email protected]>
> Subject: RE: [PATCH] drm/displayid: reduce DisplayID checksum error logging
> to debug
>
> On Mon, 23 Feb 2026, "Srinivas, Vidya" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Nikula, Jani <[email protected]>
> >> Sent: 23 February 2026 16:02
> >> To: Srinivas, Vidya <[email protected]>;
> >> [email protected]
> >> Cc: [email protected]; Srinivas, Vidya
> >> <[email protected]>
> >> Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/displayid: reduce DisplayID checksum error
> >> logging to debug
> >>
> >> On Tue, 17 Feb 2026, Vidya Srinivas <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> > The patch "drm/displayid: add quirk to ignore DisplayID checksum
> >> > errors" introduced a mechanism to bypass checksum validation for
> >> > certain panels. However, even when ignoring the error, the code
> >> > continues to log a DRM_NOTE.
> >>
> >> Please refer to commits with the usual format (see git log).
> >>
> >> > On affected hardware, this results in persistent "DisplayID
> >> > checksum invalid" messages in the system log. This noise often
> >> > misleads users into thinking there is a critical hardware failure
> >> > or a functional regression, despite the quirk successfully handling the
> issue.
> >> >
> >> > Downgrade the log level from DRM_NOTE to DRM_DEBUG_KMS. This
> keeps
> >> the
> >> > diagnostic information available for kernel developers while
> >> > silencing the unnecessary warning for end-users.
> >> >
> >> > Signed-off-by: Vidya Srinivas <[email protected]>
> >> > ---
> >> > drivers/gpu/drm/drm_displayid.c | 2 +-
> >> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >> >
> >> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_displayid.c
> >> > b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_displayid.c index 58d0bb6d2676..1f6d78fe29f2
> >> > 100644
> >> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_displayid.c
> >> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_displayid.c
> >> > @@ -69,7 +69,7 @@ validate_displayid(const u8 *displayid, int
> >> > length, int
> >> idx, bool ignore_checksu
> >> > for (i = 0; i < dispid_length; i++)
> >> > csum += displayid[idx + i];
> >> > if (csum) {
> >> > - DRM_NOTE("DisplayID checksum invalid, remainder is
> >> %d%s\n", csum,
> >> > + DRM_DEBUG_KMS("DisplayID checksum invalid, remainder is
> >> %d%s\n",
> >> > +csum,
> >> > ignore_checksum ? " (ignoring)" : "");
> >>
> >> I understand the desire to make it debug level with the quirk, but
> >> IMO it needs to be more than debug level when there is no quirk.
> >>
> >> BR,
> >> Jani.
> >>
> >
> > Hello Jani
> >
> > Thank you so much. I understand your point.
> > Only problem is other components not familiar with drm get confused
> > about the message and say it is display issue. They also report this
> > flooding is causing delay for their driver load etc.
>
> It absolutely *is* a display issue, it's got a buggy EDID. It's not a driver
> issue.
> If we go quiet about it, people will only notice the issue through missing
> advanced display features as the DisplayID got skipped.
>
> Like I said, make it debug level for displays that have the quirk
> (ignore_checksum), and keep it noisier for displays that don't. If we hit
> that,
> there's a (small) chance we can give the display vendor feedback and have it
> fixed, otherwise we can add the quirk.
>
> But the displays will never get fixed if we always keep quietly accepting
> buggy
> EDIDs.
>
>
> BR,
> Jani.
Hello Jani
Thank you so much. I understand your point.
Please ignore this patch.
Regards
Vidya
>
> >
> > Regards
> > Vidya
> >
> >>
> >> >
> >> > if (!ignore_checksum)
> >>
> >> --
> >> Jani Nikula, Intel
>
> --
> Jani Nikula, Intel
