--- Ville_Syrj�l� <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, Nov 11, 2003 at 10:50:01AM -0800, Ian Romanick wrote: > > Ville Syrj�l� wrote: > > > > I must say that I am very impressed with how far the MGA driver has > come > > since you started working on it. Now the only thing that's missing > is > > support for PCI cards. ;) > > A quick fix would be simply enabling PCI cards but keep the agpgart > restriction. The only change required would be changing the access > type to > PCI in the DMA registers. I think it should work but I don't have a > PCI > card to test with so I can't be 100% sure. >
There was a webpage with code for G450 PCI support but the author seems to be incommunicato. I haven't really looked at the changes. I don't know how different it would be from g200 PCI cards. > > > Log message: > > > Fixed GL_NV_texture_rectangle support. > > > > Any idea how tough it will be (or if it's possible!) to add support > for > > ARB_texture_non_power_of_two? Bascially, it just extends the > regular > > texture modes to not require textures be a power of two. > Mipmapping and > > all the wrap modes are still supported, and texture coordinates are > > > still speicified as [0,1] (as opposed to [0,size] as in > > NV_texture_rectangle). I suspect the hardware won't support it. > > The G400 specs say that no mipmapping and clamp only. Which are > exactly > the same restrictions that NV_texture_rectangle specifies. You might be able to get the EXT_texture_rectangle, looks similar to the NV version. > > > > Log message: > > > Texure environment updates: > > > - Each texture unit has it's own environment color but we have > only one > > > FCOL register. > > > - Move GL_BLEND handling to a separate function. > > > - Remove unnecessary memcpy of TexState[0] to TexState[1]. The > kernel > > > will not upload tex1 unless a dualtex warp pipe is used. > > > > I see to recall that an older version of the DRM did not behave > that > > way, and that's why the copy was there. That would have been a > long > > time ago (more than 18 months), so I don't think we need to support > > > that. However, the driver should refuse to load on that version of > the > > DRM. Without looking back through logs and diff, I don't know what > > > version that would have been. I don't think this is /that/ > important, > > but it might bite somebody sometime, and when it does it will take > one > > of us a looooooooong time to debug. > > I did look at the cvs logs and I think this stuff was there before > XFree86 > 4.0. Isn't the pre 4.0 drm already incompatible with the current > stuff? > the breakage was between 4.0 and 4.1, so I wouldn't worry about anything older than 4.1. Alex __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email sponsored by: ApacheCon 2003, 16-19 November in Las Vegas. Learn firsthand the latest developments in Apache, PHP, Perl, XML, Java, MySQL, WebDAV, and more! http://www.apachecon.com/ _______________________________________________ Dri-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel
