[PATCH 0/2] drm/edid: Undo the damage from adding extra_modes

2012-07-20 Thread Dave Airlie
On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 3:41 AM, Adam Jackson wrote: > On Mon, 2012-06-25 at 19:14 +0200, Sven Joachim wrote: >> On 2012-06-25 17:25 +0200, Adam Jackson wrote: >> >> > This fixes the extra_mode walk to be much more conservative. I still think >> > the whole idea is bogus and that guessing about

Re: [PATCH 0/2] drm/edid: Undo the damage from adding extra_modes

2012-07-19 Thread Dave Airlie
On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 3:41 AM, Adam Jackson a...@redhat.com wrote: On Mon, 2012-06-25 at 19:14 +0200, Sven Joachim wrote: On 2012-06-25 17:25 +0200, Adam Jackson wrote: This fixes the extra_mode walk to be much more conservative. I still think the whole idea is bogus and that guessing

[PATCH 0/2] drm/edid: Undo the damage from adding extra_modes

2012-06-25 Thread Sven Joachim
On 2012-06-25 17:25 +0200, Adam Jackson wrote: > This fixes the extra_mode walk to be much more conservative. I still think > the whole idea is bogus and that guessing about clone mode sizes is a > userspace policy decision, but apparently xrandr --newmode / --addmode is > unreasonably

[PATCH 0/2] drm/edid: Undo the damage from adding extra_modes

2012-06-25 Thread Adam Jackson
On Mon, 2012-06-25 at 19:14 +0200, Sven Joachim wrote: > On 2012-06-25 17:25 +0200, Adam Jackson wrote: > > > This fixes the extra_mode walk to be much more conservative. I still think > > the whole idea is bogus and that guessing about clone mode sizes is a > > userspace policy decision, but

[PATCH 0/2] drm/edid: Undo the damage from adding extra_modes

2012-06-25 Thread Adam Jackson
This fixes the extra_mode walk to be much more conservative. I still think the whole idea is bogus and that guessing about clone mode sizes is a userspace policy decision, but apparently xrandr --newmode / --addmode is unreasonably burdensome. This should fix a number of reported regressions,

[PATCH 0/2] drm/edid: Undo the damage from adding extra_modes

2012-06-25 Thread Adam Jackson
This fixes the extra_mode walk to be much more conservative. I still think the whole idea is bogus and that guessing about clone mode sizes is a userspace policy decision, but apparently xrandr --newmode / --addmode is unreasonably burdensome. This should fix a number of reported regressions,

Re: [PATCH 0/2] drm/edid: Undo the damage from adding extra_modes

2012-06-25 Thread Sven Joachim
On 2012-06-25 17:25 +0200, Adam Jackson wrote: This fixes the extra_mode walk to be much more conservative. I still think the whole idea is bogus and that guessing about clone mode sizes is a userspace policy decision, but apparently xrandr --newmode / --addmode is unreasonably burdensome.

Re: [PATCH 0/2] drm/edid: Undo the damage from adding extra_modes

2012-06-25 Thread Adam Jackson
On Mon, 2012-06-25 at 19:14 +0200, Sven Joachim wrote: On 2012-06-25 17:25 +0200, Adam Jackson wrote: This fixes the extra_mode walk to be much more conservative. I still think the whole idea is bogus and that guessing about clone mode sizes is a userspace policy decision, but apparently