On 18.10.2016 09:35, Karol Herbst wrote: > how sure are you, that this is needed for _every_ nvac? >
Thank you for asking. If you consider, as relevant, referring to the original commit: "drm/nouveau/disp/g94: implement workaround for dvi issue on fx380" https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=2a4bd8a <quote> Fixes the second DVI output on Quadro FX380. Thanks to NVIDIA for providing the details on the full workaround. [...] + switch (device->chipset) { + case 0x94: + case 0x96: + case 0x98: + case 0xaa: + case 0xac: + return true; [...] </quote> and to Quadro FX380 as defined: 1. https://nouveau.freedesktop.org/wiki/CodeNames/#NV50 NV96 (G96) ... 2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nvidia_Quadro G96 ... GeForce 9400 based 3. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Nvidia_graphics_processing_units#Quadro_FX_.28x800.29_series G96 ... The right question would be, for you Karol, Ben and perhaps the ones from the NVIDIA - those to which Ben refers, whether device->chipset: + case 0x94: + case 0x98: + case 0xaa: + case 0xac: are redundant, in the first place? Moreover, even if case 0x96 applies only, how sure are -you-, that this is needed for _every_ nv96? And given that I am here only the user, who is only caring for my hardware, I can only appreciate your sense of humor. ;) _______________________________________________ Nouveau mailing list Nouveau@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/nouveau