Re: Supporting fused display configurations

[Damien Lespiau <damien.lespiau@intel.com>]

On Thu, Dec 05, 2013 at 10:19:20AM -0800, Ben Widawsky wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 05, 2013 at 02:21:08PM +0000, Damien Lespiau wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 05, 2013 at 02:09:33PM +0000, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > > Patches look fine. Just relying on fuse registers being correct is like
> > > relying on vbt being correct, fraught with anxiety.
> > 
> > Well, I believe those bits are directly reflecting the fuses/straps
> > programmed (the sames that will actually disable hw), so it should be
> > better than VBT. On the other hand, that's the reason why I only check
> > from IVB on and not from ILK to not take unecessary risks on platforms
> > with no known fused config.
> 
> I'm surprised by this. We had a semi-lengthy mail on the matter
> internally, and ISTR there was no way to actually make this work for all
> cases. I guess I need to go re-read that.

Oh? I must have missed it or it wasn't broadcasted. Mind digging out the
thread again?

> > In any case, if someone with such a device could test the series :)
> 
> IMHO the patches can't be merged until it can be verified. If you want
> to call that a nak-until-then on patch 6, do. I'd much rather have a
> dynamic solution like this though.

Yes, of course! (I'd like to have the writable info in any case).

-- 
Damien