On Mon, 29 Nov 2010 13:38:36 -0500, Adam Jackson <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, 2010-11-29 at 08:55 -0800, Keith Packard wrote: > > On Mon, 29 Nov 2010 10:07:40 -0500, Adam Jackson <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Now if it seems to you wrong that we're trying to overlay magic values > > > on this logic to get the right defaults picked... well, good, that means > > > you have taste. > > > > I was actually asking how the maxpixclock value used to get picked, and > > why there's this new section of code to set a maxpixclock that hits the > > new size range. Seems weird that you're not just replacing old clocking > > values with new clocking values... > > Accident. The old code picked ranges so tight that only very small > modes fit, so pixel clock never mattered. Once you start to raise the > clock ranges, you run into a bunch of other modes in the default list > that happen to fit the sync ranges, so you need to add pixel clock > filtering to kick them out.
Thanks for the explanation. Reviewed-by: Keith Packard <[email protected]> -- [email protected]
pgpqx0ntMDPZX.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ [email protected]: X.Org development Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel Info: http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
