From: Jonas B. <jo...@so...> - 2009-04-22 06:04:30
|
Eric Anholt wrote: > On Tue, 2009-04-21 at 09:29 +0200, Jonas Bonn wrote: >> It looks like some code got left behind while generalizing. This patch >> removes the old, non-general version and fixes up the generalized version >> so that it does what its supposed to. > > NAK. > > There is SDVOB, and SDVOC. > > To detect SDVOB, you look in SDVOB. > > To detect SDVOC, you look in SDVOB on old hardware, and SDVOC on new > hardware. > OK, I understand... now the comment in the code makes sense to me, too! I thought intel_sdvo_init was being called excessively, but the real problem would have been that of the other patch I mailed. Thanks for the clarification. /Jonas |