Commit d61e7380 authored by Kyle McMartin's avatar Kyle McMartin Committed by Dave Airlie

drm: edid revision 0 is valid

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: default avatarMarko Ristola <marko.ristola@kolumbus.fi>
Signed-off-by: default avatarKyle McMartin <kyle@redhat.com>
Acked-by: default avatarJesse Barnes <jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org>
Signed-off-by: default avatarDave Airlie <airlied@linux.ie>
parent b3f5e732
...@@ -125,7 +125,7 @@ static bool edid_is_valid(struct edid *edid) ...@@ -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); DRM_ERROR("EDID has major version %d, instead of 1\n", edid->version);
goto bad; 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); DRM_ERROR("EDID has minor version %d, which is not between 0-3\n", edid->revision);
goto bad; goto bad;
} }
......
Markdown is supported
0%
or
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment