[PATCH v3] drm/exynos: calculate vrefresh instead of use a fixed value

Hey, On 2015-05-21 16:06, Gustavo Padovan wrote: > Hi Tobias, > > 2015-05-21 Tobias Jakobi : > >> Gustavo Padovan wrote: >> > From: Gustavo Padovan >> > >> > When mode's vrefresh is zero we should ask DRM core to calculate vrefresh >> > for us so we can get the correct value instead of relying

[PATCH v3] drm/exynos: calculate vrefresh instead of use a fixed value

Hi Tobias, 2015-05-21 Tobias Jakobi : > Gustavo Padovan wrote: > > From: Gustavo Padovan > > > > When mode's vrefresh is zero we should ask DRM core to calculate vrefresh > > for us so we can get the correct value instead of relying on fixed value > > defined in a macro. But if vrefresh is stil

[PATCH v3] drm/exynos: calculate vrefresh instead of use a fixed value

Gustavo Padovan wrote: > From: Gustavo Padovan > > When mode's vrefresh is zero we should ask DRM core to calculate vrefresh > for us so we can get the correct value instead of relying on fixed value > defined in a macro. But if vrefresh is still zero we should fail the > update. This works bette

[PATCH v3] drm/exynos: calculate vrefresh instead of use a fixed value

Gustavo Padovan wrote: > From: Gustavo Padovan > > When mode's vrefresh is zero we should ask DRM core to calculate vrefresh > for us so we can get the correct value instead of relying on fixed value > defined in a macro. But if vrefresh is still zero we should fail the > update. > > Suggested-b

[PATCH v3] drm/exynos: calculate vrefresh instead of use a fixed value

From: Gustavo Padovan When mode's vrefresh is zero we should ask DRM core to calculate vrefresh for us so we can get the correct value instead of relying on fixed value defined in a macro. But if vrefresh is still zero we should fail the update. Suggested-by: Daniel Stone Signed-off-by: Gustavo