Re: [gentoo-user] Re: ATI-drivers 12.3 with Kernel 3.4
Many thanks, Walt,
your patches work just fine for me.
Helmut.
On 04/16/2012 08:45:14 PM, walt wrote:
On 04/16/2012 06:09 AM, Helmut Jarausch wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> does anybody know about patches for the ATI-drivers 12.3 to work
with git-sources 3.4_rc3 ?
Well, "patch" is too formal for the ugly hack I use :)
After building your new kernel you should patch one kernel header file
before building ati-drivers (taken from lkml):
--- arch/x86/include/asm/compat.h.orig 2012-04-08 11:51:29.569528342
-0700
+++ arch/x86/include/asm/compat.h 2012-04-08 14:33:58.309972502
-0700
@@ -221,6 +221,7 @@
return (u32)(unsigned long)uptr;
}
+#ifdef CONFIG_x86_64
static inline void __user *arch_compat_alloc_user_space(long len)
{
compat_uptr_t sp;
@@ -234,6 +235,15 @@
return (void __user *)round_down(sp - len, 16);
}
+#else
+
+static inline void __user *arch_compat_alloc_user_space(long len)
+{
+ struct pt_regs *regs = task_pt_regs(current);
+ return (void __user *)regs->sp -len;
+}
+
+#endif
static inline bool is_x32_task(void)
{
Here's the ugly part: some names in compat.h were changed recently,
and
I can't be bothered to do a proper fix, so I hacked this together
instead:
--- common/lib/modules/fglrx/build_mod/firegl_public.c 2012-03-23
13:38:48.0 -0700
+++ /tmp/firegl_public.c2012-04-16 10:45:41.426582953 -0700
@@ -4181,7 +4181,7 @@
{
unsigned int p;
KCL_DEBUG5(FN_FIREGL_KAS, "%d\n", level_init);
-for_each_cpu_mask(p, cpu_possible_map)
+for (p=0; p<4; p++)
{
KCL_DEBUG1(FN_FIREGL_KAS,"Setting initial execution level
for CPU # %d\n", p);
preempt_disable();
NOTE: my new machine has 4 cpus, numbered 0 through 3, and I
hardcoded that
number into the ati code, above, instead of deciphering the new
kernel headers.
Ugly, ugly, ugly. But it works perfectly :)
If you have two cpus you should change the p<4 to p<2, etc. And then
wait
for a professional fix from ati :p
[gentoo-user] Re: ATI-drivers 12.3 with Kernel 3.4
On 04/16/2012 06:09 AM, Helmut Jarausch wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> does anybody know about patches for the ATI-drivers 12.3 to work with
> git-sources 3.4_rc3 ?
Well, "patch" is too formal for the ugly hack I use :)
After building your new kernel you should patch one kernel header file
before building ati-drivers (taken from lkml):
--- arch/x86/include/asm/compat.h.orig 2012-04-08 11:51:29.569528342 -0700
+++ arch/x86/include/asm/compat.h 2012-04-08 14:33:58.309972502 -0700
@@ -221,6 +221,7 @@
return (u32)(unsigned long)uptr;
}
+#ifdef CONFIG_x86_64
static inline void __user *arch_compat_alloc_user_space(long len)
{
compat_uptr_t sp;
@@ -234,6 +235,15 @@
return (void __user *)round_down(sp - len, 16);
}
+#else
+
+static inline void __user *arch_compat_alloc_user_space(long len)
+{
+ struct pt_regs *regs = task_pt_regs(current);
+ return (void __user *)regs->sp -len;
+}
+
+#endif
static inline bool is_x32_task(void)
{
Here's the ugly part: some names in compat.h were changed recently, and
I can't be bothered to do a proper fix, so I hacked this together instead:
--- common/lib/modules/fglrx/build_mod/firegl_public.c 2012-03-23
13:38:48.0 -0700
+++ /tmp/firegl_public.c2012-04-16 10:45:41.426582953 -0700
@@ -4181,7 +4181,7 @@
{
unsigned int p;
KCL_DEBUG5(FN_FIREGL_KAS, "%d\n", level_init);
-for_each_cpu_mask(p, cpu_possible_map)
+for (p=0; p<4; p++)
{
KCL_DEBUG1(FN_FIREGL_KAS,"Setting initial execution level for CPU #
%d\n", p);
preempt_disable();
NOTE: my new machine has 4 cpus, numbered 0 through 3, and I hardcoded that
number into the ati code, above, instead of deciphering the new kernel headers.
Ugly, ugly, ugly. But it works perfectly :)
If you have two cpus you should change the p<4 to p<2, etc. And then wait
for a professional fix from ati :p
[gentoo-user] Re: ati-drivers for xorg-server-11.0 ?
On 08/27/2011 06:37 PM, Helmut Jarausch wrote: Hi, does anybody know about an ati-driver for the new xorg-server-11.0 system. Is there an experimental drivers as it used to be. There isn't one right now. AMD usually supports the X.Org version that Ubuntu is shipping in its next version. The next Ubuntu is 11.10 and uses X.Org server 1.10. If Ubuntu switches to server 1.11, then AMD might support that. Or it might support 1.11 anyway even if Ubuntu doesn't, but this happens very rarely (if ever.)
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: ati drivers.
On Freitag 13 November 2009, igwasm wrote: > - Original Message - > From: "Volker Armin Hemmann" > To: > Sent: Friday, November 13, 2009 4:08 PM > Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: ati drivers. > > On Freitag 13 November 2009, igwasm wrote: > > - Original Message - > > From: "Volker Armin Hemmann" > > To: > > Sent: Friday, November 13, 2009 2:26 PM > > Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: ati drivers. > > > > On Freitag 13 November 2009, Igor wrote: > > > В сообщении от Пятница 13 ноября 2009 05:38:24 автор Nikos Chantziaras > > > > > > написал: > > > > On 11/12/2009 11:55 PM, Igor wrote: > > > > > В сообщении от Пятница 13 ноября 2009 00:30:35 автор Volker Armin > > > > > Hemmann > > > > > > > > > > написал: > > > > >> [...] > > > > >> yeah, unpacking in /usr/portage is completly wrong. Just follow > > > > >> the instructions. > > > > > > > > > > I strictly follow the instructions. But "emerge: there are no > > > > > ebuilds > > > > > to satisfy "=x11-base/xorg-server-1.6.3.901-r99"." > > > > > > > > Volker's instructions work, but the overlay method is more > > > > complicated than it needs to be. You can find an easier method of > > > > applying the patch here: > > > > > > > > http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-794699.html > > > > > > > > This has the benefit that it works with all versions of X.Org and not > > > > just with 1.6.3 and you don't need a custom ebuild in your local > > > > overlay. > > > > > > > > Note that the patch we're talking about does *not* fix the CPU load > > > > on moving windows; ati-drivers are just too slow with this operation. > > > > It only fixes the resizing, maximizing and opening of new windows. > > > > > > Thank you. But i have question about this patch. Why ati driver is very > > > slow in X.Org? Is it bug ati driver or X.Org? > > > > > > > > >as I wrote before, 'they' changed X a long time ago for intel drivers > > > and screwed over everybody else. So it is X fault - but X devs put the > > > fingers > > >in > > >their ears, say it is everybody's else fault and sing lalala. > > > > I really don`t understand this. X have spec and all must use it. X don`t > > must use spec of intel. If X change spec then all must change drivers. > > Open > > source driver work fine. > > > > > >that has nothign to do with spec and how to use uninitialised memory. > > Hm. Is it undoc hack in X? Could i see this diff in code? I want use it in > other distrs linux. > look at the patch and google a bit. There has been a lot of talk about this.
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: ati drivers.
- Original Message - From: "Volker Armin Hemmann" To: Sent: Friday, November 13, 2009 4:08 PM Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: ati drivers. On Freitag 13 November 2009, igwasm wrote: - Original Message - From: "Volker Armin Hemmann" To: Sent: Friday, November 13, 2009 2:26 PM Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: ati drivers. On Freitag 13 November 2009, Igor wrote: > В сообщении от Пятница 13 ноября 2009 05:38:24 автор Nikos Chantziaras > > написал: > > On 11/12/2009 11:55 PM, Igor wrote: > > > В сообщении от Пятница 13 ноября 2009 00:30:35 автор Volker Armin > > > Hemmann > > > > > > написал: > > >> [...] > > >> yeah, unpacking in /usr/portage is completly wrong. Just follow the > > >> instructions. > > > > > > I strictly follow the instructions. But "emerge: there are no > > > ebuilds > > > to satisfy "=x11-base/xorg-server-1.6.3.901-r99"." > > > > Volker's instructions work, but the overlay method is more complicated > > than it needs to be. You can find an easier method of applying the > > patch here: > > > > http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-794699.html > > > > This has the benefit that it works with all versions of X.Org and not > > just with 1.6.3 and you don't need a custom ebuild in your local > > overlay. > > > > Note that the patch we're talking about does *not* fix the CPU load on > > moving windows; ati-drivers are just too slow with this operation. It > > only fixes the resizing, maximizing and opening of new windows. > > Thank you. But i have question about this patch. Why ati driver is very > slow in X.Org? Is it bug ati driver or X.Org? > > >as I wrote before, 'they' changed X a long time ago for intel drivers and >screwed over everybody else. So it is X fault - but X devs put the >fingers >in >their ears, say it is everybody's else fault and sing lalala. I really don`t understand this. X have spec and all must use it. X don`t must use spec of intel. If X change spec then all must change drivers. Open source driver work fine. that has nothign to do with spec and how to use uninitialised memory. Hm. Is it undoc hack in X? Could i see this diff in code? I want use it in other distrs linux.
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: ati drivers.
On Freitag 13 November 2009, igwasm wrote: > - Original Message - > From: "Volker Armin Hemmann" > To: > Sent: Friday, November 13, 2009 2:26 PM > Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: ati drivers. > > On Freitag 13 November 2009, Igor wrote: > > В сообщении от Пятница 13 ноября 2009 05:38:24 автор Nikos Chantziaras > > > > написал: > > > On 11/12/2009 11:55 PM, Igor wrote: > > > > В сообщении от Пятница 13 ноября 2009 00:30:35 автор Volker Armin > > > > Hemmann > > > > > > > > написал: > > > >> [...] > > > >> yeah, unpacking in /usr/portage is completly wrong. Just follow the > > > >> instructions. > > > > > > > > I strictly follow the instructions. But "emerge: there are no ebuilds > > > > to satisfy "=x11-base/xorg-server-1.6.3.901-r99"." > > > > > > Volker's instructions work, but the overlay method is more complicated > > > than it needs to be. You can find an easier method of applying the > > > patch here: > > > > > > http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-794699.html > > > > > > This has the benefit that it works with all versions of X.Org and not > > > just with 1.6.3 and you don't need a custom ebuild in your local > > > overlay. > > > > > > Note that the patch we're talking about does *not* fix the CPU load on > > > moving windows; ati-drivers are just too slow with this operation. It > > > only fixes the resizing, maximizing and opening of new windows. > > > > Thank you. But i have question about this patch. Why ati driver is very > > slow in X.Org? Is it bug ati driver or X.Org? > > > > > >as I wrote before, 'they' changed X a long time ago for intel drivers and > >screwed over everybody else. So it is X fault - but X devs put the fingers > >in > >their ears, say it is everybody's else fault and sing lalala. > > I really don`t understand this. X have spec and all must use it. X don`t > must use spec of intel. If X change spec then all must change drivers. Open > source driver work fine. > that has nothign to do with spec and how to use uninitialised memory.
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: ati drivers.
- Original Message - From: "Volker Armin Hemmann" To: Sent: Friday, November 13, 2009 2:26 PM Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: ati drivers. On Freitag 13 November 2009, Igor wrote: В сообщении от Пятница 13 ноября 2009 05:38:24 автор Nikos Chantziaras написал: > On 11/12/2009 11:55 PM, Igor wrote: > > В сообщении от Пятница 13 ноября 2009 00:30:35 автор Volker Armin > > Hemmann > > > > написал: > >> [...] > >> yeah, unpacking in /usr/portage is completly wrong. Just follow the > >> instructions. > > > > I strictly follow the instructions. But "emerge: there are no ebuilds > > to satisfy "=x11-base/xorg-server-1.6.3.901-r99"." > > Volker's instructions work, but the overlay method is more complicated > than it needs to be. You can find an easier method of applying the > patch here: > > http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-794699.html > > This has the benefit that it works with all versions of X.Org and not > just with 1.6.3 and you don't need a custom ebuild in your local > overlay. > > Note that the patch we're talking about does *not* fix the CPU load on > moving windows; ati-drivers are just too slow with this operation. It > only fixes the resizing, maximizing and opening of new windows. Thank you. But i have question about this patch. Why ati driver is very slow in X.Org? Is it bug ati driver or X.Org? as I wrote before, 'they' changed X a long time ago for intel drivers and screwed over everybody else. So it is X fault - but X devs put the fingers in their ears, say it is everybody's else fault and sing lalala. I really don`t understand this. X have spec and all must use it. X don`t must use spec of intel. If X change spec then all must change drivers. Open source driver work fine.
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: ati drivers.
On Freitag 13 November 2009, Nikos Chantziaras wrote: > On 11/12/2009 11:55 PM, Igor wrote: > > В сообщении от Пятница 13 ноября 2009 00:30:35 автор Volker Armin Hemmann > > > > написал: > >> [...] > >> yeah, unpacking in /usr/portage is completly wrong. Just follow the > >> instructions. > > > > I strictly follow the instructions. But "emerge: there are no ebuilds to > > satisfy "=x11-base/xorg-server-1.6.3.901-r99"." > > Volker's instructions work, but the overlay method is more complicated > than it needs to be. You can find an easier method of applying the > patch here: > > http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-794699.html > > This has the benefit that it works with all versions of X.Org and not > just with 1.6.3 and you don't need a custom ebuild in your local overlay. > > Note that the patch we're talking about does *not* fix the CPU load on > moving windows; ati-drivers are just too slow with this operation. It > only fixes the resizing, maximizing and opening of new windows. > indeed., except all xorg-server versions are covered in that thread ;)
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: ati drivers.
On Freitag 13 November 2009, Igor wrote: > В сообщении от Пятница 13 ноября 2009 05:38:24 автор Nikos Chantziaras > > написал: > > On 11/12/2009 11:55 PM, Igor wrote: > > > В сообщении от Пятница 13 ноября 2009 00:30:35 автор Volker Armin > > > Hemmann > > > > > > написал: > > >> [...] > > >> yeah, unpacking in /usr/portage is completly wrong. Just follow the > > >> instructions. > > > > > > I strictly follow the instructions. But "emerge: there are no ebuilds > > > to satisfy "=x11-base/xorg-server-1.6.3.901-r99"." > > > > Volker's instructions work, but the overlay method is more complicated > > than it needs to be. You can find an easier method of applying the > > patch here: > > > > http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-794699.html > > > > This has the benefit that it works with all versions of X.Org and not > > just with 1.6.3 and you don't need a custom ebuild in your local overlay. > > > > Note that the patch we're talking about does *not* fix the CPU load on > > moving windows; ati-drivers are just too slow with this operation. It > > only fixes the resizing, maximizing and opening of new windows. > > Thank you. But i have question about this patch. Why ati driver is very > slow in X.Org? Is it bug ati driver or X.Org? > as I wrote before, 'they' changed X a long time ago for intel drivers and screwed over everybody else. So it is X fault - but X devs put the fingers in their ears, say it is everybody's else fault and sing lalala.
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: ati drivers.
В сообщении от Пятница 13 ноября 2009 05:38:24 автор Nikos Chantziaras написал: > On 11/12/2009 11:55 PM, Igor wrote: > > В сообщении от Пятница 13 ноября 2009 00:30:35 автор Volker Armin Hemmann > > > > написал: > >> [...] > >> yeah, unpacking in /usr/portage is completly wrong. Just follow the > >> instructions. > > > > I strictly follow the instructions. But "emerge: there are no ebuilds to > > satisfy "=x11-base/xorg-server-1.6.3.901-r99"." > > Volker's instructions work, but the overlay method is more complicated > than it needs to be. You can find an easier method of applying the > patch here: > > http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-794699.html > > This has the benefit that it works with all versions of X.Org and not > just with 1.6.3 and you don't need a custom ebuild in your local overlay. > > Note that the patch we're talking about does *not* fix the CPU load on > moving windows; ati-drivers are just too slow with this operation. It > only fixes the resizing, maximizing and opening of new windows. > Thank you. But i have question about this patch. Why ati driver is very slow in X.Org? Is it bug ati driver or X.Org?
[gentoo-user] Re: ati drivers.
On 11/12/2009 11:55 PM, Igor wrote: В сообщении от Пятница 13 ноября 2009 00:30:35 автор Volker Armin Hemmann написал: [...] yeah, unpacking in /usr/portage is completly wrong. Just follow the instructions. I strictly follow the instructions. But "emerge: there are no ebuilds to satisfy "=x11-base/xorg-server-1.6.3.901-r99"." Volker's instructions work, but the overlay method is more complicated than it needs to be. You can find an easier method of applying the patch here: http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-794699.html This has the benefit that it works with all versions of X.Org and not just with 1.6.3 and you don't need a custom ebuild in your local overlay. Note that the patch we're talking about does *not* fix the CPU load on moving windows; ati-drivers are just too slow with this operation. It only fixes the resizing, maximizing and opening of new windows.
[gentoo-user] Re: ati drivers.
Igor rambler.ru> writes: > I would use kde-base/kwifimanager-3.5.10 every now and then to check > networks, > IP address, or strength of signal when I would not use iwconfig or iwlist. > This will be removed soon, so what is the KDE4 equivalent? Great timing, as I need to revisit my wireless options and strategies on several laptops. One can always look at the options: 'ls /usr/portage/net-wireless' but, it is nice when folks comment on what works well with kde4, as that is my issue too. http://gentoo-portage.com/net-wireless/ gives a great interface and let's you know a bit more info. net-wireless/waveselect looks promising? Do post back what you end up using. hth, James
[gentoo-user] Re: ati-drivers to radeon
Nikos Chantziaras arcor.de> writes: <*> ATI Radeon display support │ │ │ │[*] DDC/I2C for ATI Radeon support (NEW) │ │ │ │[*] Support for backlight control (NEW) Thanks. James
[gentoo-user] Re: ati-drivers to radeon
Ward Poelmans gmail.com> writes: > Yes, change your xorg.conf. Change 'Driver "fglx"' to 'Driver "radeon"'. thanks, James
[gentoo-user] Re: ati-drivers to radeon
On 09/21/2009 08:10 PM, James wrote: Hello, Currently, on an old laptop I have this chip: 01:05.0 VGA compatible controller: ATI Technologies Inc Radeon XPRESS 200M 5955 (PCIE) (prog-if 00 [VGA controller]) using ati-drivers, all if fine with: xorg-server-1.5.3-r5 ati-drivers-8.593 xorg-x11-7.4 linux -> linux-2.6.28-gentoo-r5/ I want to convert to the open-source radeon driver I'm not finding instruction docs (except very old) so here's what I have found to do. edit /etc/make.conf: VIDEO_CARDS="radeon vesa" (I keep vesa for a backup) emerge -C ati-drivers run 'qlist -I -C x11-drivers/' and rebuild the list of supporting drivers? ??? that simple or did I miss something? One more thing. Enable DRM support in the kernel and select the Radeon DRM driver. You need this or else you won't get accelerated graphics.
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Ati-drivers emerge fails.
On Sonntag 07 Juni 2009, Nikos Chantziaras wrote: > Volker Armin Hemmann wrote: > > On Sonntag 07 Juni 2009, Nikos Chantziaras wrote: > >> Hazen Valliant-Saunders wrote: > >>> Good Day; > >>> > >>> ati-drivers fails to emerge; foolowed the somewhat out of date doc's > >>> online. > >> > >> There doesn't exist a Catalyst for Linux release yet that support kernel > >> 2.6.29. Even if you install the latest version (9.5), it won't work. > > > > it works with a patch. > > > > everything you need can be found in bugzilla. > > The patch results in the driver issuing a warning about "kernel data > malformed/corrupted" (something like that, but sounds pretty serious) at > a rate of about a dozen per second (check with dmesg). After a few > hours, it locks up. Also, the log files grow out of proportions due to > the warning flood. a) depends on your settings b) the warning seems to harmless because c) I have uptimes of days with that driver without problems.
[gentoo-user] Re: Ati-drivers emerge fails.
Volker Armin Hemmann wrote: On Sonntag 07 Juni 2009, Nikos Chantziaras wrote: Hazen Valliant-Saunders wrote: Good Day; ati-drivers fails to emerge; foolowed the somewhat out of date doc's online. There doesn't exist a Catalyst for Linux release yet that support kernel 2.6.29. Even if you install the latest version (9.5), it won't work. it works with a patch. everything you need can be found in bugzilla. The patch results in the driver issuing a warning about "kernel data malformed/corrupted" (something like that, but sounds pretty serious) at a rate of about a dozen per second (check with dmesg). After a few hours, it locks up. Also, the log files grow out of proportions due to the warning flood.
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Ati-drivers emerge fails.
On Sonntag 07 Juni 2009, Nikos Chantziaras wrote: > Hazen Valliant-Saunders wrote: > > Good Day; > > > > ati-drivers fails to emerge; foolowed the somewhat out of date doc's > > online. > > There doesn't exist a Catalyst for Linux release yet that support kernel > 2.6.29. Even if you install the latest version (9.5), it won't work. it works with a patch. everything you need can be found in bugzilla.
[gentoo-user] Re: Ati-drivers emerge fails.
Hazen Valliant-Saunders wrote: Good Day; ati-drivers fails to emerge; foolowed the somewhat out of date doc's online. There doesn't exist a Catalyst for Linux release yet that support kernel 2.6.29. Even if you install the latest version (9.5), it won't work.
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: ati-drivers-8.501 does not compile with kernel gentoo-sources 2.6.26-r3
On Mon, 24 Nov 2008 21:14:40 +0200 Nikos Chantziaras <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Arttu V. wrote: > > On 11/24/08, Volker Armin Hemmann > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> On Montag 24 November 2008, Christian wrote: > >>> Hi all, > >>> > >>> I wanted to update my kernel to 2.6.26-r3 today. But the > >>> ati-drivers version 8.501 won't compile. > >> is there a good reason to use acient drivers? > > > > They're the latest stable on x86 -- and amd64 stable ones are even > > older. > > Use the non-stable ones. 8.552-r2. The stable ones in portage are > too old. If the stable ones are unstable due to age, file a bug specifically against this matter. Simply switching to ~ ebuilds is treating the symptom, not the problem. RobbieAB signature.asc Description: PGP signature
[gentoo-user] Re: ati-drivers-8.501 does not compile with kernel gentoo-sources 2.6.26-r3
Arttu V. wrote: On 11/24/08, Volker Armin Hemmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Montag 24 November 2008, Christian wrote: Hi all, I wanted to update my kernel to 2.6.26-r3 today. But the ati-drivers version 8.501 won't compile. is there a good reason to use acient drivers? They're the latest stable on x86 -- and amd64 stable ones are even older. And stabilization issues are being fought over in, e.g., this bug: Use the non-stable ones. 8.552-r2. The stable ones in portage are too old.
[gentoo-user] Re: ati-drivers-8.552-r1 is blocking xorg-server
Volker Armin Hemmann wrote: On Sonntag 16 November 2008, Nikos Chantziaras wrote: I can't figure out how to fix this. emerge ati-drivers gives this: [ebuild N] x11-drivers/ati-drivers-8.552-r1 USE="acpi -debug" 74,042 kB [blocks B ] x11-drivers/ati-drivers (is blocking x11-base/xorg-server-1.5.2) I'm trying to modify the ebuild: don't do it. 1.5&8.552 hate each other. You will have broken composite and no aiglx. I already have broken composite (or rather, no composite at all) and neither aiglx :D (4870 with x11-drivers/radeonhd). At least with this one the card isn't frying itself (no power management with OSS drivers) and I have OpenGL working (no 3D with OSS drivers). The problem btw was that portage was lying to me. It's not ati-drivers blocking xorg-server, but the other way around; xorg-server is blocking ati-drivers. :P I got them to install. They run better than the open source drivers :P
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: ati-drivers
On 9/3/07, James <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Mark Knecht gmail.com> writes: > > > > I suspect that ATI has integrated an existing VGA core into a new > > chipset. > > yep > > > > I stick with the radeon driver if I want any real support. > > That driver did not work either > > It's a waiting game. One day, when googling, I'll find a post about that > chipset being covered. I think that it's PERFECTLY appropriate to subscribe to LKML and ask them about it. They are always interested in supporting new hardware. Often they are already working on it and can give you a schedule or tell you what kernel to build to get it working. My only point was they don't like the ati-drivers, not that they don't want to support machines if possible. Of course, ATI has to release specs for the Radeon driver to support it completely. I think they do that but somewhat slowly. Just my 2 cents, Mark > > > Had a recent similar issue with a sony laptop, for one of the employees. > It's an intel 965G. No support (yet) in the i810 driver > > oh well, they'll work eventually. Neither employee is big on 3D or > graphics anyway. > > > thx, > > James > > > > -- > [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list > > -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
[gentoo-user] Re: ati-drivers
Mark Knecht gmail.com> writes: > I suspect that ATI has integrated an existing VGA core into a new > chipset. yep > I stick with the radeon driver if I want any real support. That driver did not work either It's a waiting game. One day, when googling, I'll find a post about that chipset being covered. Had a recent similar issue with a sony laptop, for one of the employees. It's an intel 965G. No support (yet) in the i810 driver oh well, they'll work eventually. Neither employee is big on 3D or graphics anyway. thx, James -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: ati-drivers
On 9/3/07, James <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Mark Knecht gmail.com> writes: > > > > > > > Dell Inspiron 1721 is based on AMD ATI M690T chipset, Turion 64 X2 dual > > > core > > > processors with speeds from 1.8GHz to 2.2GHz, and ATI Mobility Radeon > > > X1270 > > > > > so How/where do I read which chipsets are covered by which drivers? > > > I would personally visit the Phoronix forums, sign up and ask the > > question there. > > > > On the other hand, why do you need the ati-driver package at all. Have > > you considered just using the radeon driver in the kernel until you > > get this machine up and running and then deal with this driver issue > > later? That's my usual path to making a new ATI machine useful as > > quickly as possible. > > > Got vesa working. For now that good enough. I'll give the ati-drivers another > shot, once I read somewhere where this chips is covered by the ati-drivers Glad for that much. Now the machine is usable. that's a good first step. > > > 01:05.0 VGA compatible controller: ATI Technologies Inc Unknown device 791f > > It does not even show up in my favorite hardware index: > http://sources.gentoo.org/viewcvs.py/hwdata/trunk/pcitable?rev=5 > I suspect that ATI has integrated an existing VGA core into a new chipset. sometimes it takes Linux quite awhile to catch up on this sort of issue. I had a Compaq laptop a couple of years ago with a new chipset. It was probably 4 months before I could even attempt to turn on DMA on my hard drives. The machine was very slow for quite a while. It will get worked out. Look for a reasonable location to post some info on the chipset. Note that the Linux kernel guys won't really help with this as they don't like drivers that taint the kernel. I use ATI drivers when I have to, like on my Myth frontend machines, but I stick with the radeon driver if I want any real support. Good luck, Mark -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
[gentoo-user] Re: ati-drivers
Mark Knecht gmail.com> writes: > > Dell Inspiron 1721 is based on AMD ATI M690T chipset, Turion 64 X2 dual core > > processors with speeds from 1.8GHz to 2.2GHz, and ATI Mobility Radeon X1270 > > so How/where do I read which chipsets are covered by which drivers? > I would personally visit the Phoronix forums, sign up and ask the > question there. > On the other hand, why do you need the ati-driver package at all. Have > you considered just using the radeon driver in the kernel until you > get this machine up and running and then deal with this driver issue > later? That's my usual path to making a new ATI machine useful as > quickly as possible. Got vesa working. For now that good enough. I'll give the ati-drivers another shot, once I read somewhere where this chips is covered by the ati-drivers: 01:05.0 VGA compatible controller: ATI Technologies Inc Unknown device 791f It does not even show up in my favorite hardware index: http://sources.gentoo.org/viewcvs.py/hwdata/trunk/pcitable?rev=5 James -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: ati-drivers
On 9/2/07, James <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Mark Knecht gmail.com> writes: > > > > You need to discover with lspci what ATI controller is in the machine > > and then check which ati-drivers packages support it. After doing that > > you need to make sure that the ati-drivers package you have chosen > > matches up with the kernel you are attempting to build/install. > > Well, I think you are on to something: on the dell lspci shows: > 00:00.0 Host bridge: ATI Technologies Inc Unknown device 7910 > 00:01.0 PCI bridge: ATI Technologies Inc Unknown device 7912 > 00:05.0 PCI bridge: ATI Technologies Inc Unknown device 7915 > 00:07.0 PCI bridge: ATI Technologies Inc Unknown device 7917 > 00:12.0 SATA controller: ATI Technologies Inc SB600 Non-Raid-5 SATA > 00:13.0 USB Controller: ATI Technologies Inc SB600 USB (OHCI0) > 00:13.1 USB Controller: ATI Technologies Inc SB600 USB (OHCI1) > 00:13.2 USB Controller: ATI Technologies Inc SB600 USB (OHCI2) > 00:13.3 USB Controller: ATI Technologies Inc SB600 USB (OHCI3) > 00:13.4 USB Controller: ATI Technologies Inc SB600 USB (OHCI4) > 00:13.5 USB Controller: ATI Technologies Inc SB600 USB Controller (EHCI) > 00:14.0 SMBus: ATI Technologies Inc SB600 SMBus (rev 14) > > > googling produces this: > Dell Inspiron 1721 is based on AMD ATI M690T chipset, Turion 64 X2 dual core > processors with speeds from 1.8GHz to 2.2GHz, and ATI Mobility Radeon X1270 > integrated graphics. > > > so How/where do I read which chipsets are covered by which drivers? > I would personally visit the Phoronix forums, sign up and ask the question there. Most likely a very helpful individual named Michael will be able to tell you more about which driver revision, if any, works with that Radeon. Maybe a helpful Gentoo person can answer the question sooner but it doesn't hurt to have a second opinion. He's very ATI knowledgeable and don't have a strong ati-driver anti-bias like we run into here some times. On the other hand, why do you need the ati-driver package at all. Have you considered just using the radeon driver in the kernel until you get this machine up and running and then deal with this driver issue later? That's my usual path to making a new ATI machine useful as quickly as possible. I run ati-drivers on some machine but prefer to stick with the kernel driver when I Can. Good luck whatever you do, Mark -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
[gentoo-user] Re: ati-drivers
Mark Knecht gmail.com> writes: > You need to discover with lspci what ATI controller is in the machine > and then check which ati-drivers packages support it. After doing that > you need to make sure that the ati-drivers package you have chosen > matches up with the kernel you are attempting to build/install. Well, I think you are on to something: on the dell lspci shows: 00:00.0 Host bridge: ATI Technologies Inc Unknown device 7910 00:01.0 PCI bridge: ATI Technologies Inc Unknown device 7912 00:05.0 PCI bridge: ATI Technologies Inc Unknown device 7915 00:07.0 PCI bridge: ATI Technologies Inc Unknown device 7917 00:12.0 SATA controller: ATI Technologies Inc SB600 Non-Raid-5 SATA 00:13.0 USB Controller: ATI Technologies Inc SB600 USB (OHCI0) 00:13.1 USB Controller: ATI Technologies Inc SB600 USB (OHCI1) 00:13.2 USB Controller: ATI Technologies Inc SB600 USB (OHCI2) 00:13.3 USB Controller: ATI Technologies Inc SB600 USB (OHCI3) 00:13.4 USB Controller: ATI Technologies Inc SB600 USB (OHCI4) 00:13.5 USB Controller: ATI Technologies Inc SB600 USB Controller (EHCI) 00:14.0 SMBus: ATI Technologies Inc SB600 SMBus (rev 14) googling produces this: Dell Inspiron 1721 is based on AMD ATI M690T chipset, Turion 64 X2 dual core processors with speeds from 1.8GHz to 2.2GHz, and ATI Mobility Radeon X1270 integrated graphics. so How/where do I read which chipsets are covered by which drivers? James -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
[gentoo-user] Re: ati-drivers text corruption problem.
In gmane.linux.gentoo.user, you wrote: > On Thu, 2007-06-14 at 17:17 +, Grant Edwards wrote: >> All of the recent ati-drivers seem to have a bug that corrupts >> contents of some scrolling text windows. It looks like this: >> >> http://www.visi.com/~grante/fglrxbug.png > > wow, never seen that and I've used most versions of ati-drivers up to > x11-drivers/ati-drivers-8.37.6-r1 The only program it reliably happens with is aterm. Other terminal programs don't seem to trigger the bug. I suspect that rxvt will also trigger it since they share a lot of code. I'm not sure when it started to happen. I think it worked OK back in the 8.2x series, but you can't run those drivers with newer kernels and new versions of xorg. > maybe provide your card specs? It's an IBM Thinkpad with an M22 X300 chipset w/ 64MB of RAM. I can look up the chipset rev tomorrow. >> The Xorg "radeon" driver doesn't have this problem, but DRI >> support in that driver doesn't work for some of the programs I >> run. > > unfortunately, neither the xorg radeon driver nor the ati radeon driver > give me very good performance... on a RV350 "Mobility Radeon 9600 M10". Yea, I've noticed that. The radeon driver DRI support only works for some programs and at about a 20% reduced frame rate. -- Grant Edwards grante Yow! Oh, I get it!! "The at BEACH goes on", huh, visi.comSONNY?? -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
[gentoo-user] Re: ati-drivers ebuild for 9200 and 2.6.18?
On 2006-12-30, James <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Well, using your suggestion, I have it x/kde working again, but I get this > error when I run glxinfo: > > libGL error: failed to open DRM: Operation not permitted > libGL error: reverting to (slow) indirect rendering Do you have the section at the end of xorg.conf that looks like this? Section "DRI" Mode 0666 EndSection If you google for "libGL error: failed to open DRM: Operation not permitted" That's the suggestion solution -- Grant Edwards grante Yow! .. If I had heart at failure right now, visi.comI couldn't be a more fortunate man!! -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
[gentoo-user] Re: ati-drivers ebuild for 9200 and 2.6.18?
Grant Edwards visi.com> writes: > > I have a ATI 1900 card: > > 01:00.0 VGA compatible controller: ATI Technologies Inc R580 [Radeon X1900 XT] Primary > > 01:00.1 Display controller: ATI Technologies Inc R580 [Radeon X1900 XT] Secondary > VIDEO_CARDS="radeon vesa fbdev fglrx" Well, using your suggestion, I have it x/kde working again, but I get this error when I run glxinfo: libGL error: failed to open DRM: Operation not permitted libGL error: reverting to (slow) indirect rendering Here's what I have installed: x11-drivers/ati-drivers Installed: 8.32.5 x11-libs/libdrm Installed: 2.3.0 x11-base/x11-drm Installed: 20060608 x11-base/xorg-server Installed: 1.1.1-r3 I figured the latest software might help. Also this page: http://wiki.cchtml.com/index.php/Main_Page Seemed to do the trick, and a link off of that page does suggest the ati-1900xt card is supported with many bug fixes in 8.32.5. Any ideas what I can do about the libgl error? James -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
[gentoo-user] Re: ati-drivers ebuild for 9200 and 2.6.18?
On 2006-12-29, James <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> I'm currently testing an 8.28.8-r1 ebuild. Once I'm confident >> I haven't broken anything, I'll post it. > > I have a ATI 1900 card: > > 01:00.0 VGA compatible controller: ATI Technologies Inc R580 [Radeon X1900 > XT] Primary > 01:00.1 Display controller: ATI Technologies Inc R580 [Radeon X1900 XT] > Secondary > > Let me know where you post and I test your ebuild/overlay. Don't the newer versions of ati drivers work with that card? Are you sure you want to use such an old version of the driver? > Do put up some brief instructions, since abondoning the radeon > driver, I've not been able to get anything but a black screen > out of the ati-binary driver, with any number of kernels I've > tried. There are detailed instructions at http://gentoo-wiki.com/HOWTO_ATI_Drivers > What's your entry for that 9200 card in the make.conf? VIDEO_CARDS="radeon vesa fbdev fglrx" > Can you send me the relevant portions of the xorg.conf file? For what it's worth, here's my xorg.conf file Section "ServerLayout" Identifier "X.org Configured" Screen 0 "aticonfig-Screen[0]" 0 0 InputDevice"Mouse0" "CorePointer" InputDevice"Keyboard0" "CoreKeyboard" EndSection Section "Files" FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/misc/" FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/TTF/" FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/Type1/" FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/CID/" FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/75dpi/" FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/100dpi/" EndSection Section "Module" Load "extmod" Load "dri" Load "glx" Load "dbe" Load "record" Load "xtrap" Load "type1" Load "freetype" EndSection Section "InputDevice" Identifier "Keyboard0" Driver "kbd" EndSection Section "ServerFlags" option "AIGLX" "off" EndSection Section "InputDevice" Identifier "Mouse0" Driver "mouse" Option "Protocol" "ExplorerPS/2" Option "Device" "/dev/psaux" Option "ZAxisMapping" "6 7" EndSection Section "Monitor" Identifier "Monitor0" VendorName "NEC" ModelName"Multisync 97F" DisplaySize 386289 HorizSync31.5 - 79.0 VertRefresh 50.0 - 90.0 EndSection Section "Monitor" Identifier "aticonfig-Monitor[0]" Option "VendorName" "ATI Proprietary Driver" Option "ModelName" "Generic Autodetecting Monitor" Option "DPMS" "true" EndSection Section "Device" # Driver "fglrx" Identifier "Card0" Driver "ati" VendorName "ATI Technologies Inc" BoardName "Radeon RV280 [Radeon 9200]" Option "mtrr" "off" BusID "PCI:1:0:0" EndSection Section "Device" Identifier "aticonfig-Device[0]" Driver "fglrx" EndSection Section "Screen" Identifier "Screen0" Device "Card0" Monitor"Monitor0" DefaultDepth 24 SubSection "Display" Virtual 1280 1024 Depth 8 EndSubSection SubSection "Display" Virtual 1280 1024 Depth 15 EndSubSection SubSection "Display" Virtual 1280 1024 Depth 16 EndSubSection SubSection "Display" #Virtual 1024 768 Virtual 1280 1024 Depth 24 EndSubSection EndSection Section "Screen" Identifier "aticonfig-Screen[0]" Device "aticonfig-Device[0]" Monitor"aticonfig-Monitor[0]" DefaultDepth 24 SubSection "Display" Virtual 1280 1024 Viewport 0 0 Depth 24 EndSubSection EndSection Section "DRI" Mode 0666 EndSection -- Grant Edwards grante Yow! Why is everything at made of Lycra Spandex? visi.com -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
[gentoo-user] Re: ati-drivers ebuild for 9200 and 2.6.18?
Grant Edwards visi.com> writes: > I'm currently testing an 8.28.8-r1 ebuild. Once I'm confident > I haven't broken anything, I'll post it. Hello Grant, I have a ATI 1900 card: 01:00.0 VGA compatible controller: ATI Technologies Inc R580 [Radeon X1900 XT] Primary 01:00.1 Display controller: ATI Technologies Inc R580 [Radeon X1900 XT] Secondary Let me know where you post and I test your ebuild/overlay. Do put up some brief instructions, since abondoning the radeon driver, I've not been able to get anything but a black screen out of the ati-binary driver, with any number of kernels I've tried. What's your entry for that 9200 card in the make.conf? Can you send me the relevant portions of the xorg.conf file? James -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
[gentoo-user] Re: ati-drivers ebuild for 9200 and 2.6.18?
On 2006-12-27, Grant Edwards <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 2006-12-27, Rumen Yotov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Grant Edwards HA||UCA: >>> Is there an ati-drivers ebuild that will install a Radeon >>> 9200/9250 compatible driver under 2.6.18? The most recent ATI >>> driver that works with the 9200 series is 8.28.8, but it (and >>> older versions) won't compile "out-of-the-box" under 2.6.18. > >> Read the official gentoo-doc about ATI drivers. > > I did. > >> Could use the Xorg free ATI-drivers. > > I used those for a while, but the results were rather poor. > Performance wasn't very good and there were a lot of rendering > glitches. More recently any attempt to do openGL just caused > the X server to segfault, so I had to shut of DRI completely. > After that I gave op on the Xorg ATI-driver and switched to the > ati-drivers package. > > But, then when I finally decided to upgrade my kernel, the > "stable" ati-drivers ebuild stopped working. The "testing" > ebuild works, but support for the 9200 series has been removed > from recent drivers by ATI. > > The patche required to make 8.28.8 build under 2.6.18 are > trivial (4-5 lines changed). I ought to read up on ebuilds and > submit a patch. I'm currently testing an 8.28.8-r1 ebuild. Once I'm confident I haven't broken anything, I'll post it. -- Grant Edwards grante Yow! I'm having a at RELIGIOUS EXPERIENCE... and visi.comI don't take any DRUGS -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
[gentoo-user] Re: ati-drivers ebuild for 9200 and 2.6.18?
On 2006-12-27, Rumen Yotov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Grant Edwards HA||UCA: >> Is there an ati-drivers ebuild that will install a Radeon >> 9200/9250 compatible driver under 2.6.18? The most recent ATI >> driver that works with the 9200 series is 8.28.8, but it (and >> older versions) won't compile "out-of-the-box" under 2.6.18. > Read the official gentoo-doc about ATI drivers. I did. > Could use the Xorg free ATI-drivers. I used those for a while, but the results were rather poor. Performance wasn't very good and there were a lot of rendering glitches. More recently any attempt to do openGL just caused the X server to segfault, so I had to shut of DRI completely. After that I gave op on the Xorg ATI-driver and switched to the ati-drivers package. But, then when I finally decided to upgrade my kernel, the "stable" ati-drivers ebuild stopped working. The "testing" ebuild works, but support for the 9200 series has been removed from recent drivers by ATI. The patche required to make 8.28.8 build under 2.6.18 are trivial (4-5 lines changed). I ought to read up on ebuilds and submit a patch. -- Grant Edwards grante Yow! TONY RANDALL! Is YOUR at life a PATIO of FUN?? visi.com -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
[gentoo-user] Re: ATI drivers
Richard Fish asmallpond.org> writes: > > James wrote: > > > You certainly seem quite knowledgable on these issues. Do have time > > for to help me: > > I'll try. The real question is, can I do it without posting a 27-page > message to the list again,as I have been known to do! :-> > OK, I think I've got it. I have some work-work to do before I tackle this. If I get stuck, I can either post a new thread or send private email. Your explanations are very clear. Give me a few days to get caught up, a few more days to give this a whirl! I'll let you know how it goes. James -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: ATI drivers
James wrote: > You certainly seem quite knowledgable on these issues. Do have time > for to help me: I'll try. The real question is, can I do it without posting a 27-page message to the list again,as I have been known to do! :-> First, some background and answers to the 'high-level' stuff (I paraphrased your questions below...hopefully I got them right!) 1. Do you _need_ opengl on Linux? Well, if you are asking, probably not. OpenGL is the library used for 3D and some advanced graphics applications. Examples are 3D screensavers, games (native ports or windows versions running under cedega), and some 'visualizations' for media players like xmms and amarok. There are other categories (CAD, science, etc), but again, if you are asking the question, you are probably not using any of those. More info: http://dri.sourceforge.net/doc/DRIbeginner.html 2. What is all this 'radeon', 'radeonfb', and 'ati-drivers', and 'fglrx' stuff? 'radeon' refers to the x.org driver for _all_ ATI Radeon boards. It's main limitation is that it does not support hardware 3D acceleration on R300 or newer boards. It also refers to the kernels DRI/DRM (hardware 3D acceleration) driver/module by the same name. 'radeonfb' refers to the linux kernel radeonfb graphics driver. It is used to provide a high-resolution console screen with some 2D acceleration. If the X.org file contains the option "UseFBDev", it is also used by the X server, otherwise it is unused by X. 'ati-drivers' and 'fglrx' are the same thing...'fglrx' is the name of the driver in X.org and the kernel module. Note that the x.org 'ati' driver is for very old boards, *not* for Radeons. 3. Huh? There are three possible driver configurations for an ATI Radeon board in X: A. The open-source 'radeon' driver included with X.org. B. The open-source 'radeon' driver with the kernel's 'radeon' DRM driver. C. The proprietary 'ati-drivers', aka the 'fglrx' driver and the 'fglrx' kernel module. B or C can give you hardware 3D on anything older than an R300. 'A' will use software rendering. Since your xorg.conf file contains the 'Driver "radeon"' line, you are using either A or B. 4. Ok, how do I setup 3-B? See the documentation on http://dri.freedesktop.org/wiki/. Basically you need 4 things: 1. A kernel built with CONFIG_DRM_RADEON=m or =y. 2. The 'radeon' module loaded, if not built into the kernel. 3. Your user id added to the group 'graphics' (use the 'id' command to check, 'usermod' to edit). 4. DRI configuration in the xorg.conf file. See: http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/dri-howto.xml#configure_xorg or http://dri.sourceforge.net/doc/DRIuserguide.html You should add 'Group "graphics"' to the "DRI" section in the xorg.conf file after following the instructions for #4. Then perform the steps in "Test 3D acceleration" on http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/dri-howto.xml. If it doesn't work (X starts but you have "direct rendering: no") /var/log/Xorg.0.log might help figure out what went wrong. 5. Ok, how do I setup 3-C? For this, you do not need to build a kernel module (it is built when you 'emerge ati-drivers'). You will still need to have your user id in the group graphics, and the same 'Load' instructions and "DRI" section in your xorg.conf file. You will also need an 'fglrx' Device section. 'fglrxsetup' will configure an xorg.conf file for you, but as I said previously, it gets many things wrong. The best is to simply replace the "Device" section in your current xorg.conf file with the following: IMPORTANT: you may need to change the "BusID" below to your adapters PCI address. Use 'lspci' to get that address. Everything else is pretty standard/default/safe. Section "Device" Identifier "ATI Radeon 9000" Driver "fglrx" # ### generic DRI settings ### # === disable PnP Monitor === #Option "NoDDC" # === disable/enable XAA/DRI === Option "no_accel" "no" Option "no_dri" "no" # === misc DRI settings === Option "mtrr" "off" # disable DRI mtrr mapper, driver has its own code for mtrr # ### FireGL DDX driver module specific settings ### # === Screen Management === Option "DesktopSetup" "0x0100" Option "MonitorLayout" "AUTO, AUTO" Option "IgnoreEDID" "off" Option "HSync2" "unspecified" Option "VRefresh2" "unspecified" Option "ScreenOverlap" "0" # === TV-out Management === Option "NoTV" "yes" Option "TVStandard" "NTSC-M" Option "TVHSizeAdj" "0" Option "TVVSizeAdj" "0" Option "TVHPosAdj" "0" Option "TVVPosAdj" "0" Option "TVHStartAdj""0" Option "TVColorAdj" "0" Option "GammaCorrectionI" "0x" Option "G
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: ATI drivers
On Tue, Apr 12, 2005 at 10:08:02PM +, James wrote:
> Well from my xorg.conf:
> Driver "radeon"
> VideoRam65536
>
> Section "Screen"
> Identifier "Screen 1"
> Device "Radeon-9000-M9"
> Monitor "LCDwxga"
> DefaultDepth 24
>
> So since I have a 250 on a 9000, I do not need the
> ati-drivers?
>
emerge unmerge ati-drivers ati-drivers-extra (is that the right name
for the package? something like that)
opengl-update xorg-x11
and you should be fine.
>
> >
> > Mostly, if they work, you will lose any kind of software suspend/power
> > management support. I have no idea why ATI can't support such a simple
> > thing as suspend/resume, when the necessary events have been in the
> > kernel for over a year, and every _other_ driver supports it, including
> > nvidia...this is the main reason I refuse to run the ATI drivers on my
> > mobility 9600.
>
> You mean you refuse to run ATI's drivers or the 'ati-drivers'?
> Sorry, I'm not really up on these issues. I just want something
> simple. But, a compelling reason to use the ati-drivers and a little
> help on the xorg.conf settings and I'll convert.
>
I am pretty sure he means the lousy support ATI has for their binary
drivers.
>
> > You will also lose the ability to use the radeonfb driver for your
> > console...the two drivers do not play nice together. You can use either
> > text mode or vesafb (slow) for console support.
>
> Well, 'radeonfb does not even show up in my xorg.conf file.
> Maybe you could send me an xorg.conf file that uses properly
> sets all of these parameters. (I do not know what I'm missing
> nor how to set it up and test the differences. I would like to learn.
afaik, radeonfb is a framebuffer driver for console. It has nothing
to do with X.
> You certainly seem quite knowledgable on these issues. Do have time
> for to help me:
>
> configure an xorg.conf file so I can test the benefits of the ati-drivers
> and the radeonfb? Then I can decide to use the ati-drivers or not? Earlier
> you said my chip could not even benefit from the 'ati-drivers'
>
I'll refer you to the Gentoo ATI FAQ
http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/ati-faq.xml
fglrxconfig should make a pretty good Xorg config file.
W
> If there is benefit or moral(open-source)imperative then I'll use
> the ati-drivers. However, if it takes a graphics subsystem expert
> lots of effort to effect the proper use of the ati-drivers, then
> I should stay with the radeon drivers?
>
--
* Address: 45 Spelman Hall, Princeton University 08544 *
* Phone: x68958 AIM: AngularJerk*
*E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]From: sep.dynalias.net *
panic("Unable to find empty mailbox for aha1542.\n");
2.2.16 /usr/src/linux/drivers/scsi/aha1542.c
Sortir en Pantoufles: up 1 day, 16:08
--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
[gentoo-user] Re: ATI drivers
Richard Fish asmallpond.org> writes: > > James wrote: > > >ATI Technologies Inc Radeon R250 Lf [FireGL 9000], on a portable. > > > >1. Should I switch to ATI OpenGL ? If not what do I loose? Why? > > > > > > I'm pretty sure you don't need the ATI drivers, the built-in radeon > driver has 3D acceleration for your card. You only need the ati-drivers > for R300 or greater. Well from my xorg.conf: Driver "radeon" VideoRam65536 Section "Screen" Identifier "Screen 1" Device "Radeon-9000-M9" Monitor "LCDwxga" DefaultDepth 24 So since I have a 250 on a 9000, I do not need the ati-drivers? > > Mostly, if they work, you will lose any kind of software suspend/power > management support. I have no idea why ATI can't support such a simple > thing as suspend/resume, when the necessary events have been in the > kernel for over a year, and every _other_ driver supports it, including > nvidia...this is the main reason I refuse to run the ATI drivers on my > mobility 9600. You mean you refuse to run ATI's drivers or the 'ati-drivers'? Sorry, I'm not really up on these issues. I just want something simple. But, a compelling reason to use the ati-drivers and a little help on the xorg.conf settings and I'll convert. > You will also lose the ability to use the radeonfb driver for your > console...the two drivers do not play nice together. You can use either > text mode or vesafb (slow) for console support. Well, 'radeonfb does not even show up in my xorg.conf file. Maybe you could send me an xorg.conf file that uses properly sets all of these parameters. (I do not know what I'm missing nor how to set it up and test the differences. I would like to learn. > > >3. Is this just another Open Source versus Vendor Closed source > >binaries pissing_contest or is the ATI OpenGL really > >beneficial in means of performance/features? > > > > > > Well, I don't get particularly religious about open-source vs. closed > source drivers...but the ATI drivers are for me the clearest example of > why linux drivers should be opensource. If a vendor is going to provide > closed-source drivers, I expect them to keep them up to date, support > most features in the current kernel release, and provide some kind of > support to their users. ATI doesn't seem interested in any of > thesereleases every 2-3 months, with the same issues over and over > againno response to email or web forums (checkout rage3d.com)...etc. > > > That, and their configuration script still asks me whether I want to > enable middle-mouse-button emulation...I haven't needed that in, oh, 8 > years!! And this is a linux 2.6 kernelyou don't *need* to detect my > mouse, the kernel already did!! And thats besides asking me what the > HSync and VSync ranges are for an LCD display connected via DVI which is > _just_ _plain_ _idiotic_. "X -configure" is sooo much more sane--it > still misconfigures my mouse, but at least it doesn't ask me stupid > questions while doing it! > You certainly seem quite knowledgable on these issues. Do have time for to help me: configure an xorg.conf file so I can test the benefits of the ati-drivers and the radeonfb? Then I can decide to use the ati-drivers or not? Earlier you said my chip could not even benefit from the 'ati-drivers' If there is benefit or moral(open-source)imperative then I'll use the ati-drivers. However, if it takes a graphics subsystem expert lots of effort to effect the proper use of the ati-drivers, then I should stay with the radeon drivers? James -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
[gentoo-user] Re: ati-drivers
Tim Janssen uwo.ca> writes: > You could try unmerging ati-drivers and opengl-update and then > re-emerging them. That approach *usually* works for me. This did the trick! Thanks James -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
[gentoo-user] Re: ati-drivers
Mitko Moshev gmail.com> writes: > >>Calculating world dependencies ...done! > >>[blocks B ] >>x11-base/opengl-update-2.1.1-r1) > >>What's the trick to do this update? > The newest ati-drivers are pmasked. That means they are still considered > unstable (they DO work. I have no problems. all this means is they > aren't guaranteed to work 99.9% of the time. more like 95%). All you > need to do is add "media-video/ati-drivers~x86" to > /etc/portage/package.keywords . This assumes that your arch is x86 if > you have and amd64 or ppc, adjust accordingly. Read the handbook about > things like package.mask, masked packages, etc. after that a simple > emerge -u ati-drivers will update them. What sort of thing would happen if the ati-drivers did not work? I have an enormous amount of packages that cannot be upgraded until I upgrade the ati-drivers ( to 8.10.10 from 8.8.25). If I do this, how will I know when I can remove this from the package.keywords list? Or do I just leave this "media-video/ati-drivers~x86" in the package.keywords list forever? I'm going to do the upgrade as you have suggested. Thanks! James -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
[gentoo-user] Re: ati-drivers
Mitko Moshev gmail.com> writes: -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: ati-drivers
James wrote: Edward Catmur catmur.co.uk> writes: emerge -u ati-drivers Yea, well just because there is a later version of the ati-drivers it will not let me update !!! Error: the emerge -p ati-drivers These are the packages that I would merge, in order: Calculating dependencies ...done! [blocks B ] emerge -s ati-drivers shows: Latest version available: 8.10.19 Latest version installed: 8.8.25 but I cannot update to 8.10.19 for some odd reason James -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list Try emerge unmerge ati-drivers and then emerge -a ati-drivers -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: ati-drivers
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 It looks like portage might be trying to emerge an updated version of opengl-update which is a dependency of the new ati-drivers but the old ati-drivers you have are blocking the new opengl-update. You could try unmerging ati-drivers and opengl-update and then re-emerging them. That approach *usually* works for me. Tim -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFCWtJdaRz9jZhWXD0RAgWtAJ9XLFPXKU42sOmZPZW4nU5oHmzcJACfRR18 +cZmzqVBg6pOrLA11G4+Xrk= =SqNR -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
[gentoo-user] Re: ati-drivers
Edward Catmur catmur.co.uk> writes: > emerge -u ati-drivers Yea, well just because there is a later version of the ati-drivers it will not let me update !!! Error: the
