Hi Ross, Firstly, thanks for you time to take a look on this.
Actually my main concern here is why we need to boot up X11 MatchBox with multiple video’s module (intel, vesa & fbdev) while we can fix this to only load “intel” during the X startup ? I guess this looks more proper and clean way of using the pure “intel” driver right ? (please correct me if I’m wrong) .. As per what you can see from the xorg.conf comparison, if without “intel” been specify in the xorg.conf, even though X is loading the “intel” module, but still, we can see that X tries to allocates other FB modules as well (vesa + fbdev), and (“I guess”) this will provide some additional properties/information been transferred over to X which will cause as per warning message below (WW) : xorg.conf without intel : ------------------------------- … [123777.155] (II) LoadModule: "intel" [123777.155] (II) Loading /usr/lib64/xorg/modules/drivers/intel_drv.so … [123777.172] (II) LoadModule: "fbdev" [123777.172] (II) Loading /usr/lib64/xorg/modules/drivers/fbdev_drv.so … [123777.173] (II) LoadModule: "vesa" [123777.173] (II) Loading /usr/lib64/xorg/modules/drivers/vesa_drv.so … [123777.175] (II) modesetting: Driver for Modesetting Kernel Drivers: kms [123777.175] (II) FBDEV: driver for framebuffer: fbdev [123777.175] (II) VESA: driver for VESA chipsets: vesa [123777.175] (--) using VT number 3 … [123777.198] (II) intel(0): Using Kernel Mode Setting driver: i915, version 1.6.0 20141121 [123777.203] (WW) Falling back to old probe method for modesetting [123777.203] (WW) Falling back to old probe method for fbdev [123777.203] (II) Loading sub module "fbdevhw" [123777.203] (II) LoadModule: "fbdevhw" [123777.203] (II) Loading /usr/lib64/xorg/modules/libfbdevhw.so [123777.205] (II) Module fbdevhw: vendor="X.Org Foundation" [123777.205] compiled for 1.16.3, module version = 0.0.2 [123777.205] ABI class: X.Org Video Driver, version 18.0 [123777.205] (WW) Falling back to old probe method for vesa [123777.209] (--) intel(0): gen8 engineering sample [123777.209] (--) intel(0): CPU: x86-64, sse2, sse3, ssse3, sse4.1, sse4.2 … While, if we fixed the xorg.conf to “intel”, we can see a better and more clean startup of X which only concerns to handle the Intel driver. Plus, there’s no warning messages (WW) from other FB modules (vesa + fbdev) occurs : xorg.conf with intel : -------------------------- … [123856.696] (II) LoadModule: "intel" [123856.697] (II) Loading /usr/lib64/xorg/modules/drivers/intel_drv.so … [123856.761] (II) intel(0): Using Kernel Mode Setting driver: i915, version 1.6.0 20141121 [123856.764] (--) intel(0): gen8 engineering sample … I’m seeking for your advise and reason why meta-intel never fix the xorg.conf to “intel” in the first place ? Thanks. Regards, Azril From: Burton, Ross [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2015 10:32 PM To: Ahmad, Mohd Azril Cc: [email protected] Subject: Re: [meta-intel] Why meta-intel never specify the Intel-SNA as a primary Xorg driver in common folder ? On 15 April 2015 at 11:52, Ahmad, Mohd Azril <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Here I provide you the X log comparison between without and with xorg.conf : And both are using the intel driver. I don't understand what the problem is here. Ross
-- _______________________________________________ meta-intel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/meta-intel
