Hi,
On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 8:31 AM Doug Anderson wrote:
>
> > Hopefully BOE gets back to you soon, and there's no rush, I'm just an
> > end user who is extremely appreciative of all the work everyone on the
> > list and the kernel in general put in to make my machines usable.
>
> Just FYI that
Hi,
On Fri, Jul 10, 2020 at 10:11 AM Steev Klimaszewski wrote:
>
>
> On 7/10/20 9:47 AM, Doug Anderson wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> >
> > But should I continue on this path,
> > It's probably worth getting dithering working on your sdm845 anyway in
> > case anyone actually does put a 6bpp panel on this
On 7/10/20 9:47 AM, Doug Anderson wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> But should I continue on this path,
> It's probably worth getting dithering working on your sdm845 anyway in
> case anyone actually does put a 6bpp panel on this SoC.
>
>
>> or should we be finding others who
>> have an N61 and see what their
Hi,
On Thu, Jul 9, 2020 at 11:15 PM Steev Klimaszewski wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On 7/9/20 11:12 PM, Doug Anderson wrote:
> >> root@c630:~# bus=$(i2cdetect -l | grep sn65 | sed
> >> 's/i2c-\([0-9]*\).*$/\1/')
> >> root@c630:~# i2cdump ${bus} 0x50 i > edid
> >> WARNING! This program can confuse your
On Thu, Jul 9, 2020 at 11:15 PM Steev Klimaszewski wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On 7/9/20 11:12 PM, Doug Anderson wrote:
> >> root@c630:~# bus=$(i2cdetect -l | grep sn65 | sed
> >> 's/i2c-\([0-9]*\).*$/\1/')
> >> root@c630:~# i2cdump ${bus} 0x50 i > edid
> >> WARNING! This program can confuse your I2C
On 7/9/20 10:17 PM, Steev Klimaszewski wrote:
On 7/9/20 10:12 PM, Steev Klimaszewski wrote:
On 7/9/20 9:14 PM, Doug Anderson wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, Jul 9, 2020 at 6:38 PM Doug Anderson
wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, Jul 9, 2020 at 6:19 PM Steev Klimaszewski
wrote:
Hi Doug,
I've been testing 5.8
Hi,
On 7/9/20 11:12 PM, Doug Anderson wrote:
root@c630:~# bus=$(i2cdetect -l | grep sn65 | sed 's/i2c-\([0-9]*\).*$/\1/')
root@c630:~# i2cdump ${bus} 0x50 i > edid
WARNING! This program can confuse your I2C bus, cause data loss and worse!
I will probe file /dev/i2c-16, address 0x50, mode i2c
On 7/9/20 10:12 PM, Steev Klimaszewski wrote:
On 7/9/20 9:14 PM, Doug Anderson wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, Jul 9, 2020 at 6:38 PM Doug Anderson
wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, Jul 9, 2020 at 6:19 PM Steev Klimaszewski
wrote:
Hi Doug,
I've been testing 5.8 and linux-next on the Lenovo Yoga C630, and
with
On 7/9/20 9:14 PM, Doug Anderson wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, Jul 9, 2020 at 6:38 PM Doug Anderson wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, Jul 9, 2020 at 6:19 PM Steev Klimaszewski wrote:
Hi Doug,
I've been testing 5.8 and linux-next on the Lenovo Yoga C630, and with this
patch applied, there is really bad banding
Hi,
On Thu, Jul 9, 2020 at 8:43 PM Steev Klimaszewski wrote:
>
>
> On 7/9/20 10:17 PM, Steev Klimaszewski wrote:
> >
> > On 7/9/20 10:12 PM, Steev Klimaszewski wrote:
> >>
> >> On 7/9/20 9:14 PM, Doug Anderson wrote:
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, Jul 9, 2020 at 6:38 PM Doug Anderson
> >>>
Hi,
On Thu, Jul 9, 2020 at 6:38 PM Doug Anderson wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, Jul 9, 2020 at 6:19 PM Steev Klimaszewski wrote:
> >
> > Hi Doug,
> >
> > I've been testing 5.8 and linux-next on the Lenovo Yoga C630, and with this
> > patch applied, there is really bad banding on the display.
> >
>
Hi,
On Thu, Jul 9, 2020 at 6:19 PM Steev Klimaszewski wrote:
>
> Hi Doug,
>
> I've been testing 5.8 and linux-next on the Lenovo Yoga C630, and with this
> patch applied, there is really bad banding on the display.
>
> I'm really bad at explaining it, but you can see the differences in the
>
Hi,
On 13/02/2020 00:04, Doug Anderson wrote:
> Andrzej / Neil,
>
> On Mon, Feb 3, 2020 at 4:21 PM Doug Anderson wrote:
>>
>> Andrzej / Neil,
>>
>> On Mon, Feb 3, 2020 at 3:37 PM Bjorn Andersson
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Wed 18 Dec 14:35 PST 2019, Douglas Anderson wrote:
>>>
The current bridge
Andrzej / Neil,
On Mon, Feb 3, 2020 at 4:21 PM Doug Anderson wrote:
>
> Andrzej / Neil,
>
> On Mon, Feb 3, 2020 at 3:37 PM Bjorn Andersson
> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed 18 Dec 14:35 PST 2019, Douglas Anderson wrote:
> >
> > > The current bridge driver always forced us to use 24 bits per pixel
> > >
On Wed 18 Dec 14:35 PST 2019, Douglas Anderson wrote:
> The current bridge driver always forced us to use 24 bits per pixel
> over the DP link. This is a waste if you are hooked up to a panel
> that only supports 6 bits per color or fewer, since in that case you
> ran run at 18 bits per pixel
Andrzej / Neil,
On Mon, Feb 3, 2020 at 3:37 PM Bjorn Andersson
wrote:
>
> On Wed 18 Dec 14:35 PST 2019, Douglas Anderson wrote:
>
> > The current bridge driver always forced us to use 24 bits per pixel
> > over the DP link. This is a waste if you are hooked up to a panel
> > that only supports
The current bridge driver always forced us to use 24 bits per pixel
over the DP link. This is a waste if you are hooked up to a panel
that only supports 6 bits per color or fewer, since in that case you
ran run at 18 bits per pixel and thus end up at a lower DP clock rate.
Let's support this.
17 matches
Mail list logo
