From: Rob Pearce <[email protected]>
The Intel D410PT(LW) and D425KT Mini-ITX desktop boards both show up as
having LVDS but the hardware is not populated. This patch adds them to
the list of such systems. Patch is against 3.11.4
Signed-off-by: Rob Pearce <[email protected]>
---
Patch revised to match the D425KT exactly as the D425KTW does have LVDS.
According to Intel's documentation, the D410PTL and D410PLTW don't.
diff -uprN -X linux-3.11.4/Documentation/dontdiff linux-3.11.4/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lvds.c linux-3.11.4-ovs/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lvds.c
--- linux-3.11.4/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lvds.c 2013-10-22 19:00:30.000000000 +0100
+++ linux-3.11.4-ovs/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lvds.c 2013-10-27 15:51:25.000000000 +0000
@@ -696,6 +696,22 @@
},
{
.callback = intel_no_lvds_dmi_callback,
+ .ident = "Intel D410PT",
+ .matches = {
+ DMI_MATCH(DMI_BOARD_VENDOR, "Intel"),
+ DMI_MATCH(DMI_BOARD_NAME, "D410PT"),
+ },
+ },
+ {
+ .callback = intel_no_lvds_dmi_callback,
+ .ident = "Intel D425KT",
+ .matches = {
+ DMI_MATCH(DMI_BOARD_VENDOR, "Intel"),
+ DMI_EXACT_MATCH(DMI_BOARD_NAME, "D425KT"),
+ },
+ },
+ {
+ .callback = intel_no_lvds_dmi_callback,
.ident = "Intel D510MO",
.matches = {
DMI_MATCH(DMI_SYS_VENDOR, "Intel"),
On Sun, Oct 27, 2013 at 04:13:42PM +0000, Rob Pearce wrote:
> From: Rob Pearce <[email protected]>
>
> The Intel D410PT(LW) and D425KT Mini-ITX desktop boards both show up as
> having LVDS but the hardware is not populated. This patch adds them to
> the list of such systems. Patch is against 3.11.4
>
> Signed-off-by: Rob Pearce <[email protected]>
> ---
> Patch revised to match the D425KT exactly as the D425KTW does have LVDS.
> According to Intel's documentation, the D410PTL and D410PLTW don't.
Any reason you don't want this in the stable tree as well?
thanks,
greg k-h
On Sun, Oct 27, 2013 at 10:33:02AM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 27, 2013 at 04:13:42PM +0000, Rob Pearce wrote:
> > From: Rob Pearce <[email protected]>
> >
> > The Intel D410PT(LW) and D425KT Mini-ITX desktop boards both show up as
> > having LVDS but the hardware is not populated. This patch adds them to
> > the list of such systems. Patch is against 3.11.4
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Rob Pearce <[email protected]>
> > ---
> > Patch revised to match the D425KT exactly as the D425KTW does have LVDS.
> > According to Intel's documentation, the D410PTL and D410PLTW don't.
>
> Any reason you don't want this in the stable tree as well?
None. Picked up for -fixes, thanks for the patch. Also I prefer the patch
change log in the commit message proper and less screaming in the summary
;-) All fixed while applying.
-Daniel
--
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
+41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch
On 27/10/13 17:33, Greg KH wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 27, 2013 at 04:13:42PM +0000, Rob Pearce wrote:
>> From: Rob Pearce <[email protected]>
>>
>> The Intel D410PT(LW) and D425KT Mini-ITX desktop boards both show up as
>> having LVDS but the hardware is not populated. This patch adds them to
>> the list of such systems. Patch is against 3.11.4
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Rob Pearce <[email protected]>
>> ---
>> Patch revised to match the D425KT exactly as the D425KTW does have LVDS.
>> According to Intel's documentation, the D410PTL and D410PLTW don't.
>
> Any reason you don't want this in the stable tree as well?
>
No, should be in stable. Sorry, I'm obviously getting some etiquette
wrong (this is the first patch I've submitted).
Cheers,
Rob
On 10/27/2013 10:33 AM, Greg KH wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 27, 2013 at 04:13:42PM +0000, Rob Pearce wrote:
>> From: Rob Pearce <[email protected]>
>>
>> The Intel D410PT(LW) and D425KT Mini-ITX desktop boards both show up as
>> having LVDS but the hardware is not populated. This patch adds them to
>> the list of such systems. Patch is against 3.11.4
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Rob Pearce <[email protected]>
>> ---
>> Patch revised to match the D425KT exactly as the D425KTW does have LVDS.
>> According to Intel's documentation, the D410PTL and D410PLTW don't.
>
> Any reason you don't want this in the stable tree as well?
>
Hi Greg,
pardon my ignorance, but I thought this was supposed to be the maintainer's call to make ?
Did I get this wrong ?
Thanks,
Guenter
On Sun, Oct 27, 2013 at 11:35:58AM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On 10/27/2013 10:33 AM, Greg KH wrote:
> >On Sun, Oct 27, 2013 at 04:13:42PM +0000, Rob Pearce wrote:
> >>From: Rob Pearce <[email protected]>
> >>
> >>The Intel D410PT(LW) and D425KT Mini-ITX desktop boards both show up as
> >>having LVDS but the hardware is not populated. This patch adds them to
> >>the list of such systems. Patch is against 3.11.4
> >>
> >>Signed-off-by: Rob Pearce <[email protected]>
> >>---
> >>Patch revised to match the D425KT exactly as the D425KTW does have LVDS.
> >>According to Intel's documentation, the D410PTL and D410PLTW don't.
> >
> >Any reason you don't want this in the stable tree as well?
> >
>
> Hi Greg,
>
> pardon my ignorance, but I thought this was supposed to be the maintainer's call to make ?
> Did I get this wrong ?
Maintainer occasionally fumble it, so it's better when the patch submitter
also thinks about this. I can always change it when I disagree ;-)
-Daniel
--
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
+41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch