Menu
▾
▴
linux-fbdev-devel
|
From: James S. <jsi...@tr...> - 2002-02-25 17:58:53
|
> Hi, > this patch is to avoid the cooking of monitors from inside the > framebuffer subsystem. Normally this would be made by > fbmon_valid_timings function, but actually this function does nothing. > So i start writing a new implementation that will make some checks, note > that is not the full answer because it requires to user use another data > structures normally don't used, but for now it checks the basic stuff. > bye Patch is where? Also please send the patch to me, Geert and the fbdev list. . --- |o_o | |:_/ | Give Micro$oft the Bird!!!! // \ \ Use Linux!!!! (| | ) /'_ _/`\ ___)=(___/ |
|
From: Miles L. <mi...@me...> - 2002-02-27 05:14:34
Attachments:
fbmon_c.patch
|
Carlos wrote: > > Hi, > this patch is to avoid the cooking of monitors from inside the > framebuffer subsystem. Normally this would be made by > fbmon_valid_timings function, but actually this function does nothing. > So i start writing a new implementation that will make some checks, note > that is not the full answer because it requires to user use another data > structures normally don't used, but for now it checks the basic stuff. > (i will continue improving this, i use this on uclinux not on linux so i > probably have another things in mind when i create this patches) Hi Carlos, I have CCed the fbdev mailing list, since they seem like a much better target audience for your patch. Also, there is a much greater likelihood of your patch getting into Linus' tree if it is sent to him by whoever is the current primary FBDev maintainer. I apologize for attaching the file rather than including the text. I don't trust my current mail client to not mangle it. |
|
From: Geert U. <ge...@li...> - 2002-02-27 09:43:30
|
On Tue, 26 Feb 2002, Miles Lane wrote:
> Carlos wrote:
> > this patch is to avoid the cooking of monitors from inside the
> > framebuffer subsystem. Normally this would be made by
> > fbmon_valid_timings function, but actually this function does nothing.
> > So i start writing a new implementation that will make some checks, note
> > that is not the full answer because it requires to user use another data
> > structures normally don't used, but for now it checks the basic stuff.
> > (i will continue improving this, i use this on uclinux not on linux so i
> > probably have another things in mind when i create this patches)
>
> Hi Carlos,
>
> I have CCed the fbdev mailing list, since they seem like a much
> better target audience for your patch. Also, there is a much
> greater likelihood of your patch getting into Linus' tree if
> it is sent to him by whoever is the current primary FBDev
> maintainer.
>
> I apologize for attaching the file rather than including the
> text. I don't trust my current mail client to not mangle it.
I just noticed some things I overlooked yesterday:
- The `pixclock' parameter is in ps (picoseconds), not Hz, so the test
pixelclock > (fb_info->monspecs.hfmax * htotal)
is completely wrong! The old code in fbmon.c is correct though, except for
being commented out due to long long arithmetic. IMHO it would be better to
rewrite it so it doesn't use long long arithmetic.
- No frame buffer device calls fbmon_valid_timings(). The few that seem to
call it, have the call protected by #if 0/#endif.
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- ge...@li...
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
|
|
From: Carlos M. D. V. <ca...@em...> - 2002-02-27 16:02:25
Attachments:
fbmon_c.patch
|
> > I just noticed some things I overlooked yesterday: > > - The `pixclock' parameter is in ps (picoseconds), not Hz, so the > test > > pixelclock > (fb_info->monspecs.hfmax * htotal) > > is completely wrong! The old code in fbmon.c is correct though, > except for being commented out due to long long arithmetic. IMHO > it would be better to rewrite it so it doesn't use long long > arithmetic. > > - No frame buffer device calls fbmon_valid_timings(). The few that > seem to call it, have the call protected by #if 0/#endif. > Hi, after all this talking i did it another way (while i'm trying to get the vesa specification to autodetect monitor specifications). now it checks straight for frequencies... -- "Solo me arrepiento de unos * de menos y unos ++ de sobra" Carlos Manuel Duclos Vergara |
|
From: Geert U. <ge...@li...> - 2002-02-27 16:02:51
|
Hi Carlos,
> > I just noticed some things I overlooked yesterday:
> >
> > - The `pixclock' parameter is in ps (picoseconds), not Hz, so the
> > test
> >
> > pixelclock > (fb_info->monspecs.hfmax * htotal)
> >
> > is completely wrong! The old code in fbmon.c is correct though,
> > except for being commented out due to long long arithmetic. IMHO
> > it would be better to rewrite it so it doesn't use long long
> > arithmetic.
> >
> > - No frame buffer device calls fbmon_valid_timings(). The few that
> > seem to call it, have the call protected by #if 0/#endif.
>
> after all this talking i did it another way (while i'm trying to get the
> vesa specification to autodetect monitor specifications).
>
> now it checks straight for frequencies...
But it's still not correct: pixelclock is in ps, not Hz.
Please read and understand the old #if 0'd out code...
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- ge...@li...
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
|
Thanks for helping keep SourceForge clean.
X