From: Kyle M. <ky...@in...> - 2009-02-25 03:08:47
|
From: Kyle McMartin <ky...@re...> edid->revision == 0 should be valid (at least, so the error message indicates. :) and wikipedia seems to indicate that EDID 1.0 existed. We can dump the entire check, since edid->revision is a u8, so it can't ever be less than 0. Marko reports in RH bz#476735 that his monitor claims to be EDID 1.0, and therefore hits the check and is stuck at 800x600 because of it. Reported-by: Marko Ristola <mar...@ko...> Signed-off-by: Kyle McMartin <ky...@re...> --- diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_edid.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_edid.c index 5a4d324..ec14dd8 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_edid.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_edid.c @@ -125,7 +125,7 @@ static bool edid_is_valid(struct edid *edid) DRM_ERROR("EDID has major version %d, instead of 1\n", edid->version); goto bad; } - if (edid->revision <= 0 || edid->revision > 3) { + if (edid->revision > 3) { DRM_ERROR("EDID has minor version %d, which is not between 0-3\n", edid->revision); goto bad; } |