Hi, since it's weekend and I'm a little bit bored, i will try to sum up some of the different opinions/discussions a little bit and add my own conclusion: Am Mittwoch, den 15.10.2008, 13:17 +0200 schrieb Rafał Miłecki:
Moreover I also don't see point of using -I and -D suffixes for DVI. ... Last confusing thing in my opinion is using DVI-D for HDMI output.
Am Mittwoch, den 15.10.2008, 16:47 +0200 schrieb Egbert Eich:
-I and -D is irrelevant for the user (in most cases at least). For the user it would even be more useful to know if it is a single or dual link DVI port - as this determines the maximum resolution possible. Adding this would clutter up things even more :(
Am Mittwoch, den 15.10.2008, 10:05 -0400 schrieb Alex Deucher:
I personally prefer (a) since it seems more logical to me and easier for users to understand. The physical connectors are what the user sees. A lot of people don't really know that DVI-I is really a combination of analog and digital, so it's easy for confusion to arise when you see more outputs listed than connectors on your card.
Am Donnerstag, den 16.10.2008, 07:34 +0200 schrieb Rafał Miłecki:
Maybe some crazy idea... What about xorg.conf option like "SplitDVI" "boolean"? ... And I mean false by default as most users don't need that splitting.
Am Donnerstag, den 16.10.2008, 12:20 +0200 schrieb Egbert Eich:
Sceme A would implicetly imply what Alex would prefer: to combine the two physical outputs into a single logical one (it would be closer to what we term a connector in RadeonHD) and only expose a single output to randr (and thus to the user). This would require an entirely different handling code wise than what we do at the moment. Thus if we have an option to select between both handlings (and to support devices like you've described) we'd have to keep both code paths around (I don't say it's impossible, it just is another degree of freedom that needs testing).
Am Freitag, den 17.10.2008, 16:23 +0200 schrieb Matthias Hopf:
I probably don't want to support two naming schemes.
Am Donnerstag, den 16.10.2008, 00:21 +0200 schrieb Hans Ulrich Niedermann:
What other connector types apart from VGA and DVI are there? I have seen LVDS/PANEL here, but I can't tell about HDMI, TV-Out, DisplayPort, all of which have been absent from this discussion so far.
Can we make a comprehensivelist of connector and signal types before trying to come to a conclusion based on the very limited subset of VGA and DVI ports? .... This usage of "-" and "_" looks ugly, from a non-programmer POV.
Counting from zero instead of one... unnatural for non-programmers.
Why do these names need numbers in them when there is only one of each sort?
"LVDS" might be technically correct, but is probably known to much less people than VGA and DVI. "PANEL" is probably better-known, but there could be and even better word?
Am Donnerstag, den 16.10.2008, 08:21 +0000 schrieb Mark Struberg:
So as Ulrich already mentioned: to me there currently IS NO standard naming schema, and from a users perspective there is no difference if you have to change an 'DVI-0' to a 'DVI-I_0' or write a more descriptive 'DVI-I_0/digital'
I'd probably vote (a) if there would be a real standard naming schema and one could simply change the driver name without having to change other scripts, but without it's imho really pointless.
Am Freitag, den 17.10.2008, 16:48 +0200 schrieb Matthias Hopf:
I think we also agree on the need of a specific HDMI connector. .... The laptop monitor is called a panel, I don't know a different word for that...
Am Freitag, den 17.10.2008, 19:25 +0200 schrieb Egbert Eich:
The term LVDS is rather technical - yet used by all other drivers.
From the POV of an programmer which has to get get his presentation on
Hopefully i don't have missed something important, if i did just leave me a note. Now to my conclusions. First of all we really need to change something, the number of replies to this thread shows that people are unhappy with the current situation. Second: What we really need isn't a change to the naming scheme radeonhd uses, but a standard xrandr naming scheme all drivers use, just imaging how usefully an hotkey in mplayer/xine/vlc would be to switch your current output to TV-OUT/HDMI (something i do at the moment with a shell script before mplayer starts), or some option in OpenOffice Impress to switch from PANEL to an external output when the presentation starts.... Additionally: Currently xrandr distinguish between outputs and connectors (AFAIK), but only have names for the outputs. So for the case of DVI we currently end up with something like: DVI-[ADI]_[0-9]+/(analog|digital) When we add the options of split TMDS lines we would end up with: DVI-[ADI]_[0-9]+/(analog|single digital [12]|dual digita) Which is in my opinion just a big mess. the wall i just want to connect the beamer and hit start in OpenOffice, wich is the equivalent off running "xrandr --output DVI --auto --above PANEL" and getting OpenOffice to output full screen on DVI. I don't really care if this connector is a single link, dual link, analog or what ever, it should just work because of auto detection whats connected.
From the POV of the multimedia guy wanting to watch the latest block buster on my TV i want to start the movie, select the language, hit a button and get comfortable, because video (and audio, but that's another question) gets routed to my TV.
From the POV of the hardware freak wanting to get multiple outputs over the same connector to work i need to be able to specify exactly which part of the connector should be driven by which output.
So i really vote for not changing anything with radeonhd, but moving this discussion to the xrandr/xserver mailing list, and improving xrandr to work with different standardized connector and output names. One last thing to add to the discussion about the DVI splitters: Am Donnerstag, den 16.10.2008, 12:20 +0200 schrieb Egbert Eich:
Sounds like an interesting device :) More comprehensive description would be "annoying". The really problem with (E)EDID and DVI/HDMI is that the standard doesn't say a word about what should happen with (E)EDID information in the case of a (de)multiplexer, splitter or pass through device. Sometimes i even ended up with wiring an EEPROM to the DDC bus, because we didn't got an M$ windows driver to do what a want them to do. Making modelines fully configurable was a really god idea when designing X.
Bye, Christian. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: radeonhd+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: radeonhd+help@opensuse.org