> Hi Adrien, > > just some coding-style remarks, and thanks for improving the Intel > graphics driver! I was just tired of not having native resolution on my laptop. Now it works (as well as many others resolutions as low as 640x350). > > if (intel_propose_display_mode(&target, mode, mode)) > > return B_BAD_VALUE; > > + // TODO : it may be acceptable to continue when using > > panel fitting, > > + // since the data from propose_display_mode will not > > actually get any > > + // use > > The if block should get parenthesis now, since the comment makes it a > multi-line if-block. The TODO refers to the whole if block above, so I see it as outside of the block. > > if ((gInfo->head_mode& HEAD_MODE_B_DIGITAL) != 0) { > > + // For LVDS panels, we actuallyalways set the native > > mode in hardware > > + // Then we use the panel fitter to scale the picture to > > that. > > + display_mode hardware_target; > > + bool needs_scaling = false; > > The correct variable names would be "hardwareTarget" and > "needsScaling". Yes. I get confused by all the underscore in struct members and register names in this file. > > + // TODO : use the info from EDID 1.2 > > + /* Each detailed_monitor has a type, find the first > > one which is > > + * actually a detailed_timing > > + hardware_target.virtual_width = gInfo->edid_info > > + .detailed_monitor[0].data.detailed_timing. > > h_visible; > > + hardware_target.virtual_height = gInfo->edid_info > > + .detailed_monitor[0].data.detailed_timing. > > v_visible; > > + */ > > Why the mix of different comment styles? This will be removed in my next commit anyway. > > - write32(INTEL_PANEL_FIT_CONTROL, 0); > > + // Disable panel fitting, but enable 8 to 6-bit > > dithering > > The sentence casing in comments is preferred (I think), but you do it > inconsistently, you start many other comments that read like > sentences > lowercase (nitpicking, I know). The existing comments are already inconsistent. I'll fix if I notice. -- Adrien.