wrong dpi after update

[Bernd Schubert]

Alex Deucher wrote:

> On Dec 31, 2007 8:59 PM, Bernd Schubert <bernd-schubert at gmx.de> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I'm using Debian Sid on my desktop system, but I did the last update some
>> weeks ago. After updating today several parts of X got updated and now
>> something goes wrong with display-size detection and hence the display
>> dpi is wrong (as are all font sizes).
>>
>> (II) RADEON(0): Supported additional Video Mode:
>> (II) RADEON(0): clock: 162.0 MHz   Image Size:  367 x 275 mm
>>
>> bernd at bathl ~>xrandr
>> Screen 0: minimum 320 x 200, current 1600 x 1200, maximum 1600 x 1200
>> VGA-0 disconnected (normal left inverted right x axis y axis)
>> DVI-0 connected 1600x1200+0+0 (normal left inverted right x axis y axis)
>> 367mm x 275mm
>>    1600x1200      60.0*+   59.9
>>
>> But:
>>
>> (II) RADEON(0): EDID Version: 1.3
>> (II) RADEON(0): Digital Display Input
>> (II) RADEON(0): Max H-Image Size [cm]: horiz.: 41  vert.: 31
>> (II) RADEON(0): Gamma: 2.20
>>
>> 410x310 mm is the correct display size, but somehow by default 367x275 mm
>> are used. And even though EDID provides correct information?
>> Setting the correct value with "xrandr --fbdev 410x310" does work, but in
>> the past this did work automatically?
> 
> Both numbers are coming from the edid.  We use the size from the
> detailed timing block (367 x 275 mm).

So my monitor provides 2 different edid information and unfortunately the
wrong one is used? Well, I guess I can't modify the firmware of my
display :(
What about a database of broken displays?

Also, I think randr for some reason seems to overwrite given xorg.conf
display sizes

after xf86InitialConfiguration
(**) RADEON(0): Display dimensions: (410, 310) mm
(**) RADEON(0): DPI set to (99, 98)
(II) Loading sub module "fb"
(II) LoadModule: "fb"
(II) Loading /usr/lib/xorg/modules//libfb.so

And then later on 

(II) GLX: Initialized DRI GL provider for screen 0
(II) RADEON(0): Setting screen physical size to 367 x 275

I think the first is taken from my xorg.conf display section. Bug or
feature?

Thanks,
Bernd