Bug 61962
Summary: | Dell 1600X Laptop Display Panel type has invalid vertical refresh rate | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Retired] Red Hat Public Beta | Reporter: | Barry K. Nathan <barryn> |
Component: | hwdata | Assignee: | Michael Fulbright <msf> |
Status: | CLOSED RAWHIDE | QA Contact: | Brock Organ <borgan> |
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | medium | ||
Version: | skipjack-beta1 | ||
Target Milestone: | --- | ||
Target Release: | --- | ||
Hardware: | i386 | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2002-04-15 19:37:03 UTC | Type: | --- |
Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
Embargoed: | |||
Bug Depends On: | |||
Bug Blocks: | 61901 |
Description
Barry K. Nathan
2002-03-26 10:26:11 UTC
Thanks for the bug report I'll look into it. I get the same results on my Inspiron 8000. I asked Dell about this, a while ago, and the respose I got was that the primary display was the external one. If it was not connected, DAC probing was actually expected return such an odd value as 1. At least, this was oen of the hand-waving explanations I got when I complained that things didn't work very well with the nvidia geforce2go video card I got. I've been using mostly the VESA driver ever since (that doesn't use the retrace times at all), so things work fine despite the `1'. I considered using the proprietary driver from nvidia, but it won't let the laptop suspend :-( I hope you haven't got an nvidia card. I guess we need to change the hwdata values for this monitor to be a little more tolerant. This already has 59-80 for the refresh rate... I'm not sure what else to put there. I'm still seeing this with skipjack-beta2. The refresh rate might be specified as 59-80 for all I know, but the *installer* is going ahead and showing "1", and I have to manually specify 59-61 (I assume a larger range would work too). It sounds to me like the installer may be ignoring the data for some reason. :( (I haven't looked at the source or anything like that yet, however.) This is a bug in the hwdata. Fixed in hwdata-0.13-1. Fix confirmed in 0.14-1 |