On Fri, Jul 14, 2017 at 12:46:08PM +0300, Jani Nikula wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Jul 2017, Jim Bride wrote:
> > According to the eDP spec, when the count field in TEST_SINK_MISC
> > increments then the six bytes of sink CRC information in the DPCD
> > should be valid.
On Tue, 11 Jul 2017, Jim Bride wrote:
> According to the eDP spec, when the count field in TEST_SINK_MISC
> increments then the six bytes of sink CRC information in the DPCD
> should be valid. Unfortunately, this doesn't seem to be the case
> on some panels, and as a
On Tuesday, July 11, 2017 3:19:54 PM PDT Jim Bride wrote:
> According to the eDP spec, when the count field in TEST_SINK_MISC
> increments then the six bytes of sink CRC information in the DPCD
> should be valid. Unfortunately, this doesn't seem to be the case
> on some panels, and as a result we
If you had sent these 2 in a separated series I believe it would had
passed CI so I could merge today.
Also it would be better if you want to speed up things with a bit of
sense of progress since the other 2 patches in this series will probably
require some rework.
On Tue, 2017-07-11 at 15:19
According to the eDP spec, when the count field in TEST_SINK_MISC
increments then the six bytes of sink CRC information in the DPCD
should be valid. Unfortunately, this doesn't seem to be the case
on some panels, and as a result we get some incorrect and inconsistent
values from the sink CRC DPCD