[PATCH edid-decode 1/3] Do the EDID version parsing before anything else

[Tormod Volden]

On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 10:23 AM, walter harms <wharms at bfs.de> wrote:
>
>
> Am 20.12.2011 22:17, schrieb Tormod Volden:
>> From: Tormod Volden <debian.tormod at gmail.com>
>>
>> So that the version conformance flags can be used in other code.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Tormod Volden <debian.tormod at gmail.com>
>> ---
>>  edid-decode.c |   38 +++++++++++++++++++-------------------
>>  1 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/edid-decode.c b/edid-decode.c
>> index ab4bde8..c3e556f 100644
>> --- a/edid-decode.c
>> +++ b/edid-decode.c
>> @@ -944,6 +944,25 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv)
>>       // return 1;
>>      }
>>
>> +    printf("EDID version: %hd.%hd\n", edid[0x12], edid[0x13]);
>> +    if (edid[0x12] == 1) {
>> +     if (edid[0x13] > 4) {
>> +         printf("Claims > 1.4, assuming 1.4 conformance\n");
>> +         edid[0x13] = 4;
>> +     }
>
> I have  learned that changing the original data can lead to
> fatal consequences later on. It may not a problem now but could
> you store edid[0x13] in revesion_id or so ?
> That would improve readability and keep the data in the original state.
>
>
>> +     switch (edid[0x13]) {
>> +     case 4:
>> +         claims_one_point_four = 1;
>> +     case 3:
>> +         claims_one_point_three = 1;
>> +     case 2:
>> +         claims_one_point_two = 1;
>> +     default:
>> +         break;
>> +     }
>> +     claims_one_point_oh = 1;
>> +    }
>> +
>
> Is the fall thou intended here ? If yes a small comment would help.
> re,
>  wh
>

Hi Walter,

Good points, but I should maybe have been more clear about it: This
patch just moves a block of code, I am not changing it at all.

I will consider your comments for later patches.

Thanks,
Tormod