Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v3 2/2] drivers: i915: Default max backlight brightness value

2011-11-08 Thread Olof Johansson
On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 2:47 PM, Matthew Garrett mj...@srcf.ucam.org wrote: On Tue, Nov 08, 2011 at 02:41:56PM -0800, Simon Que wrote: There is a backup kernel partition that can be used for boot. Failing that, the system can boot from a recovery image over USB. So absolutely no video code

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v3 2/2] drivers: i915: Default max backlight brightness value

2011-11-08 Thread Olof Johansson
Hi, On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 3:11 PM, Matthew Garrett mj...@srcf.ucam.org wrote: On Tue, Nov 08, 2011 at 03:02:00PM -0800, Olof Johansson wrote: How about a DMI table check that overrides whatever is setup (or not setup) from the video bios? We know exactly what platforms need this so

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 2/2] drivers: i915: Default backlight PWM frequency

2011-11-10 Thread Olof Johansson
Hi, On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 5:50 PM, Simon Que s...@chromium.org wrote: If the firmware did not initialize the backlight PWM registers, set up a default PWM frequency of 200 Hz.  This is determined using the following formula:  freq = refclk / (128 * pwm_max) The PWM register allows the

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2] drivers: i915: Default backlight PWM frequency

2011-11-11 Thread Olof Johansson
Hi, A collection of nits below. Thanks, -Olof On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 07:48:55PM -0800, Simon Que wrote: If the firmware did not initialize the backlight PWM registers, set up a default PWM frequency of 200 Hz. This is determined using the following formula: freq = refclk / (128 *

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v4] drivers: i915: Default backlight PWM frequency

2011-11-11 Thread Olof Johansson
. If no refclk frequency is found, the max PWM will be zero, which results in no change to the PWM registers. Signed-off-by: Simon Que s...@chromium.org Acked-by: Olof Johansson o...@lixom.net Looks much better. I'm OK with this solution. Matthew? -Olof

Re: [Intel-gfx] linux-next: manual merge of the drm-intel tree with the drm tree

2014-01-22 Thread Olof Johansson
On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 2:06 AM, Daniel Vetter daniel.vet...@ffwll.ch wrote: Hi Stephen, On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 4:04 AM, Stephen Rothwell s...@canb.auug.org.au wrote: Hi all, Today's linux-next merge of the drm-intel tree got a conflict in drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c between commit

Re: [Intel-gfx] linux-next: manual merge of the drm-intel tree with the drm tree

2014-01-23 Thread Olof Johansson
On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 5:21 PM, Olof Johansson o...@lixom.net wrote: On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 2:06 AM, Daniel Vetter daniel.vet...@ffwll.ch wrote: Hi Stephen, On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 4:04 AM, Stephen Rothwell s...@canb.auug.org.au wrote: Hi all, Today's linux-next merge of the drm-intel

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH] i915: Use 120MHz LVDS SSC clock for gen5/gen6/gen7

2013-11-14 Thread Olof Johansson
-off-by: Duncan Laurie dlau...@chromium.org [olof: Fixup for recent base, switched from if/else to single call] Signed-off-by: Olof Johansson o...@lixom.net --- Daniel, This applies on top of -next, which I'm presuming is close to your for-3.13 base right now. It'd be good to see this go in since