Re: [Intel-gfx] [RFC][PATCH 0/2] drm: PATH prop for all connectors?

2019-08-01 Thread Li, Sun peng (Leo)
On 2019-08-01 5:51 a.m., Pekka Paalanen wrote: > On Tue, 16 Jul 2019 14:59:58 + > "Li, Sun peng (Leo)" wrote: > >> On 2019-07-11 3:29 a.m., Pekka Paalanen wrote: >>> Wait, one can write udev rules for connectors and stuff? >>> How? What can they do? >> >> I was using it to generate

Re: [Intel-gfx] [RFC][PATCH 0/2] drm: PATH prop for all connectors?

2019-08-01 Thread Pekka Paalanen
On Tue, 16 Jul 2019 14:59:58 + "Li, Sun peng (Leo)" wrote: > On 2019-07-11 3:29 a.m., Pekka Paalanen wrote: > > Wait, one can write udev rules for connectors and stuff? > > How? What can they do? > > I was using it to generate user-friendly device names for the mst aux > implementation: >

Re: [Intel-gfx] [RFC][PATCH 0/2] drm: PATH prop for all connectors?

2019-07-16 Thread Li, Sun peng (Leo)
On 2019-07-11 3:29 a.m., Pekka Paalanen wrote: > Wait, one can write udev rules for connectors and stuff? > How? What can they do? I was using it to generate user-friendly device names for the mst aux implementation: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/315900/?series=63237=2 Leo

Re: [Intel-gfx] [RFC][PATCH 0/2] drm: PATH prop for all connectors?

2019-07-11 Thread Pekka Paalanen
On Wed, 10 Jul 2019 18:43:53 -0400 Lyude Paul wrote: > (adding sunpeng...@amd.com to the thread here, since this is relevant to the > DP > aux device work) > > I mentioned this in IRC, but figured I should mention it on the ML as well so > it > can be discussed further. Honestly: I don't like

Re: [Intel-gfx] [RFC][PATCH 0/2] drm: PATH prop for all connectors?

2019-07-11 Thread Daniel Vetter
On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 06:43:53PM -0400, Lyude Paul wrote: > (adding sunpeng...@amd.com to the thread here, since this is relevant to the > DP > aux device work) > > I mentioned this in IRC, but figured I should mention it on the ML as well so > it > can be discussed further. Honestly: I don't

Re: [Intel-gfx] [RFC][PATCH 0/2] drm: PATH prop for all connectors?

2019-07-10 Thread Lyude Paul
(adding sunpeng...@amd.com to the thread here, since this is relevant to the DP aux device work) I mentioned this in IRC, but figured I should mention it on the ML as well so it can be discussed further. Honestly: I don't like the way we implement the path prop for MST. Mainly because * It

Re: [Intel-gfx] [RFC][PATCH 0/2] drm: PATH prop for all connectors?

2019-06-27 Thread Michel Dänzer
On 2019-06-27 9:35 a.m., Pekka Paalanen wrote: > > Are connector names in xrandr still using type_id in their names? Yes, they are. -- Earthling Michel Dänzer | https://www.amd.com Libre software enthusiast | Mesa and X developer

Re: [Intel-gfx] [RFC][PATCH 0/2] drm: PATH prop for all connectors?

2019-06-27 Thread Pekka Paalanen
On Thu, 13 Jun 2019 22:42:08 +0200 Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Thu, Jun 13, 2019 at 09:43:33PM +0300, Ville Syrjala wrote: > > From: Ville Syrjälä > > > > Here's a possible apporoach for providing userspace with > > some stable connector identifiers. Combine with the bus > > name of the GPU and

Re: [Intel-gfx] [RFC][PATCH 0/2] drm: PATH prop for all connectors?

2019-06-13 Thread Daniel Vetter
On Thu, Jun 13, 2019 at 09:43:33PM +0300, Ville Syrjala wrote: > From: Ville Syrjälä > > Here's a possible apporoach for providing userspace with > some stable connector identifiers. Combine with the bus > name of the GPU and you should have some kind of real > physical path description.

[Intel-gfx] [RFC][PATCH 0/2] drm: PATH prop for all connectors?

2019-06-13 Thread Ville Syrjala
From: Ville Syrjälä Here's a possible apporoach for providing userspace with some stable connector identifiers. Combine with the bus name of the GPU and you should have some kind of real physical path description. Unfortunately the ship has sailed for MST connectors because userspace is already