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

Reply via email to