On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 08:51:57AM -0800, Aaron Plattner wrote: > On 02/20/2014 12:47 AM, Ville Syrjälä wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 04:22:19PM -0800, Aaron Plattner wrote: > >> On 05/31/2013 07:01 AM, [email protected] wrote: > >>> From: Ville Syrjälä <[email protected]> > >>> > >>> Using just one decimal place for dotclock and refresh rates loses quite > >>> a bit of information. When dealing with 60Hz vs. 59.94Hz refresh rate > >>> modes for example, it's useful to see at least two decimal places. For > >>> the dotclock in similar cases, three decimal places seems quite a bit > >>> better than just one. > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Ville Syrjälä <[email protected]> > >>> --- > >>> xrandr.c | 18 +++++++++--------- > >>> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) > >>> > >>> diff --git a/xrandr.c b/xrandr.c > >>> index 94e5c2e..9467c29 100644 > >>> --- a/xrandr.c > >>> +++ b/xrandr.c > >>> @@ -1564,7 +1564,7 @@ crtc_apply (crtc_t *crtc) > >>> rr_outputs[o] = crtc->outputs[o]->output.xid; > >>> mode = crtc->mode_info->id; > >>> if (verbose) { > >>> - printf ("crtc %d: %12s %6.1f +%d+%d", crtc->crtc.index, > >>> + printf ("crtc %d: %12s %6.2f +%d+%d", crtc->crtc.index, > >>> crtc->mode_info->name, mode_refresh (crtc->mode_info), > >>> crtc->x, crtc->y); > >>> for (o = 0; o < crtc->noutput; o++) > >>> @@ -3589,7 +3589,7 @@ main (int argc, char **argv) > >>> XRRModeInfo *mode = find_mode_by_xid > >>> (output_info->modes[j]); > >>> int f; > >>> > >>> - printf (" %s (0x%x) %6.1fMHz", > >>> + printf (" %s (0x%x) %6.3fMHz", > >>> mode->name, (int)mode->id, > >>> (double)mode->dotClock / 1000000.0); > >>> for (f = 0; mode_flags[f].flag; f++) > >>> @@ -3600,10 +3600,10 @@ main (int argc, char **argv) > >>> if (j < output_info->npreferred) > >>> printf (" +preferred"); > >>> printf ("\n"); > >>> - printf (" h: width %4d start %4d end %4d total %4d > >>> skew %4d clock %6.1fKHz\n", > >>> + printf (" h: width %4d start %4d end %4d total %4d > >>> skew %4d clock %6.2fKHz\n", > >>> mode->width, mode->hSyncStart, > >>> mode->hSyncEnd, > >>> mode->hTotal, mode->hSkew, mode_hsync > >>> (mode) / 1000); > >>> - printf (" v: height %4d start %4d end %4d total %4d > >>> clock %6.1fHz\n", > >>> + printf (" v: height %4d start %4d end %4d total %4d > >>> clock %6.2fHz\n", > >>> mode->height, mode->vSyncStart, > >>> mode->vSyncEnd, mode->vTotal, > >>> mode_refresh (mode)); > >>> mode->modeFlags |= ModeShown; > >>> @@ -3630,7 +3630,7 @@ main (int argc, char **argv) > >>> if (strcmp (jmode->name, kmode->name) != 0) > >>> continue; > >>> mode_shown[k] = True; > >>> kmode->modeFlags |= ModeShown; > >>> - printf (" %6.1f", mode_refresh (kmode)); > >>> + printf (" %6.2f", mode_refresh (kmode)); > >>> if (kmode == output->mode_info) > >>> printf ("*"); > >>> else > >>> @@ -3651,13 +3651,13 @@ main (int argc, char **argv) > >>> > >>> if (!(mode->modeFlags & ModeShown)) > >>> { > >>> - printf (" %s (0x%x) %6.1fMHz\n", > >>> + printf (" %s (0x%x) %6.3fMHz\n", > >>> mode->name, (int)mode->id, > >>> (double)mode->dotClock / 1000000.0); > >>> - printf (" h: width %4d start %4d end %4d total %4d skew > >>> %4d clock %6.1fKHz\n", > >>> + printf (" h: width %4d start %4d end %4d total %4d skew > >>> %4d clock %6.2fKHz\n", > >>> mode->width, mode->hSyncStart, mode->hSyncEnd, > >>> mode->hTotal, mode->hSkew, mode_hsync (mode) / > >>> 1000); > >>> - printf (" v: height %4d start %4d end %4d total %4d > >>> clock %6.1fHz\n", > >>> + printf (" v: height %4d start %4d end %4d total %4d > >>> clock %6.2fHz\n", > >>> mode->height, mode->vSyncStart, mode->vSyncEnd, > >>> mode->vTotal, > >>> mode_refresh (mode)); > >>> } > >>> @@ -3747,7 +3747,7 @@ main (int argc, char **argv) > >>> if (rate == rates[i]) > >>> break; > >>> if (i == nrate) { > >>> - fprintf (stderr, "Rate %.1f Hz not available for this size\n", > >>> rate); > >>> + fprintf (stderr, "Rate %.2f Hz not available for this size\n", > >>> rate); > >> > >> This is referring to an RandR 1.1 rate, which is returned by the server > >> as a signed short. It'll never match if the user specifies anything > >> other than an even decimal, so it doesn't really make sense to print > >> more digits here. > > > > 'rate' can be whatever the user specified, so ideally we should print it > > with the same precision that the user used. But doing that seems more > > trouble that it's worth. And if we don't go that dar, then I don't see > > any problem with printing it using the same precision that is used > > everywhere else. > > > > But I don't really care that much. If you prefer to drop this hunk, I'm > > fine with that. > > That's fair. I pushed these changes: > > remote: Updating patchwork state for > http://patchwork.freedesktop.org/project/Xorg/list/ > remote: I: patch #13760 updated using rev > 8f9b993342fddfceaa1afbec2996ce10038f10d7. > remote: I: patch #13761 updated using rev > 00c795e99fe29ecd56e05e915e508c7af0ac39ad. > remote: I: 2 patch(es) updated to state Accepted. > To git.freedesktop.org:/git/xorg/app/xrandr > 7ede207f9064..00c795e99fe2 master -> master
Thanks. > > >>> exit (1); > >>> } > >>> } > >>> > > -- > Aaron -- Ville Syrjälä Intel OTC _______________________________________________ [email protected]: X.Org development Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel Info: http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
