On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 5:44 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Pekka Enberg wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 8:49 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>> > The conclusion is crystal clear, breaking an ABI via a "flag day"
>> > cleanup/feature/etc is:
>> >
>> > ?- wrong
>> >
>> > ?- harmful
>> >
>> > ?- limits the
* "C. Bergstr?m" wrote:
> Pekka Enberg wrote:
> >On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 8:49 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >>The conclusion is crystal clear, breaking an ABI via a "flag day"
> >>cleanup/feature/etc is:
> >>
> >> - wrong
> >>
> >> - harmful
> >>
> >> - limits the developer base
> >>
> >> - limits th
* Pekka Enberg wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 8:49 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > The conclusion is crystal clear, breaking an ABI via a "flag day"
> > cleanup/feature/etc is:
> >
> > ?- wrong
> >
> > ?- harmful
> >
> > ?- limits the developer base
> >
> > ?- limits the tester base
> >
> > ?- wast
Pekka Enberg wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 8:49 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
>> The conclusion is crystal clear, breaking an ABI via a "flag day"
>> cleanup/feature/etc is:
>>
>> - wrong
>>
>> - harmful
>>
>> - limits the developer base
>>
>> - limits the tester base
>>
>> - wastes time and
On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 8:49 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> The conclusion is crystal clear, breaking an ABI via a "flag day"
> cleanup/feature/etc is:
>
> - wrong
>
> - harmful
>
> - limits the developer base
>
> - limits the tester base
>
> - wastes time and effort. (fewer developers/testers means
* Ben Skeggs wrote:
> > But here's the thing: if you expect people to do development, they _need_
> > to be able to mix things. A kernel developer needs to be able to update
> > their kernel. And a kernel _tester_ needs to be able to test that kernel.
>
> Here's the thing. *You* pushed for no
On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Fri, 5 Mar 2010, Dave Airlie wrote:
> >
> > if not then:
> > http://people.fedoraproject.org/~airlied/xorg-x11-drv-nouveau-0.0.16-2.20100218git2964702.fc13.test.src.rpm
> >
> > That src rpm should be rebuildable on F12, I just removed the requires
On Fri, 5 Mar 2010, Dave Airlie wrote:
>
> if not then:
> http://people.fedoraproject.org/~airlied/xorg-x11-drv-nouveau-0.0.16-2.20100218git2964702.fc13.test.src.rpm
>
> That src rpm should be rebuildable on F12, I just removed the requires
> on F13 stuff.
Well, that wants the new kernel, but
On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 3:17 PM, Linus Torvalds
wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, 5 Mar 2010, Dave Airlie wrote:
>>
>> wget
>> http://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/packages/xorg-x11-drv-nouveau/0.0.16/2.20100218git2964702.fc13/src/xorg-x11-drv-nouveau-0.0.16-2.20100218git2964702.fc13.src.rpm
>> rebuild + install.
On Fri, 5 Mar 2010, Dave Airlie wrote:
>
> wget
> http://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/packages/xorg-x11-drv-nouveau/0.0.16/2.20100218git2964702.fc13/src/xorg-x11-drv-nouveau-0.0.16-2.20100218git2964702.fc13.src.rpm
> rebuild + install.
This one doesn't work on F12.
It wants xorg-x11-server-deve
http://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=26570
Shawn Starr changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=26496
--- Comment #7 from Joseph Jezak 2010-03-04 18:42:55 PST
---
If this helps at all, I can reproduce the problem. glxgears seems to run
properly. The games "crack-attack" and "tomatoes" work properly, but
occasionally have some polygons that a
>>
>> Anyway, since I had looked at the libdrm sources, I had most of this on my
>> machine anyway, so I've compiled it all, and am going to reboot and see if
>> I can make a few symlinks work.
>>
>> IOW, right now I have this:
>>
>> [r...@nehalem ~]# cd /usr/lib64/xorg/modules/drivers/
>> [r
On Fri, 5 Mar 2010, Luc Verhaegen wrote:
>
> In an ideal world, you shouldn't be forced to update anything except
> some/all of the driver bits.
>
> But the fact that libdrm is lumped together as it is, and that mesa is a
> monolith, forces you to update a more significant portion of your
>
On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> Anyway, since I had looked at the libdrm sources, I had most of this on my
> machine anyway, so I've compiled it all, and am going to reboot and see if
> I can make a few symlinks work.
>
> IOW, right now I have this:
>
>[r...@nehalem ~]# cd
On Thu, Mar 04, 2010 at 05:08:00PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, 5 Mar 2010, Luc Verhaegen wrote:
> >
> > libdrm is composed of the main libdrm, and several driver specific
> > libdrms today (... and libkms, yes).
>
> It's actually not libdrm that is the primary issue, I'm sorry f
On Thu, Mar 04, 2010 at 04:41:19PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
>
> > The F13 packages *will* work, so long as you're not bisecting back and
> > forth.
>
> How do I install just the F13 libdrm thing, without changing everything
> else? I'm willing to try. We can make it part of the 2.6.34 rel
On Fri, 5 Mar 2010, Luc Verhaegen wrote:
>
> libdrm is composed of the main libdrm, and several driver specific
> libdrms today (... and libkms, yes).
It's actually not libdrm that is the primary issue, I'm sorry for saying
that.
It's the nouveau_drv.so thing - the actual X driver.
Anyway,
On Thu, 2010-03-04 at 16:08 -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> On Fri, 5 Mar 2010, Dave Airlie wrote:
> >
> > Speaking as distro maintainer here,
> >
> > No because we've got versioned interfaces and we are happy to support them
> > yes it would be nice sometimes to dream about this, but its a maj
On Fri, 5 Mar 2010, Ben Skeggs wrote:
>
> The idea of staging was to allow for exactly the second problem, so why
> are you surprised? The fact Fedora ships nouveau is irrelevant, we also
> expect that for the most part people will be using our packages, which
> deal with the ABI issues.
The f
On Fri, 5 Mar 2010, Dave Airlie wrote:
>
> Speaking as distro maintainer here,
>
> No because we've got versioned interfaces and we are happy to support them
> yes it would be nice sometimes to dream about this, but its a major explosion
> in
> the testing matrix. You have to realise the more
On Fri, 5 Mar 2010, Dave Airlie wrote:
>
> I'm not saying it doesn't happen in other drivers from time to time, but
> when it does its treated as regression, for nouveau and STAGING that
> isn't what the Nouveau project (which Stephane mostly speaks for) seems
> to want at this stage.
The pr
http://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=26872
Nix changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Kernel 2.6.33 fails to |Kernel 2.6.33 fails to
|suspend
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 15:03, Linus Torvalds
wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Adam Jackson wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 2010-03-04 at 11:14 -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>> > On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Matthew Garrett wrote:
>> > > If you'd made it clear that you wanted the interface to be stable
>> > > before it
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 15:09, Brian Paul wrote:
> Jesse Barnes wrote:
>> Would anyone have objections if these lists moved to freedesktop.org?
>> The recent thread with Linus about the drm pull request highlights the
>> post lag and non-subscriber aspect of the current lists, and that
>> leaves as
On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 9:28 AM, Linus Torvalds
wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>>
>> Is it really just nouveau? I've not looked, but I bet the intel driver and
>> the radeon driver have _exactly_ the same "oh, I'm the wrong version, I
>> will now kill myself" behavior.
>
> O
>>
>> Its nouveau project not X not DRM, stop generalising the situation.
>
> Is it really just nouveau? I've not looked, but I bet the intel driver and
> the radeon driver have _exactly_ the same "oh, I'm the wrong version, I
> will now kill myself" behavior.
>
> I certainly seem to remember some
On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> Is it really just nouveau? I've not looked, but I bet the intel driver and
> the radeon driver have _exactly_ the same "oh, I'm the wrong version, I
> will now kill myself" behavior.
Ok, I cloned the drm tree just to see, and it does seem like it'
On Thu, 2010-03-04 at 15:19 -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> What would happen if I changed DRIVER_PATCHLEVEL to 1 for the i915 driver?
Nothing. :) Only the major version is supposed to signify outright
incompatibility, the minor version signifies backwards compatibility
within the same major v
On Fri, 05 Mar 2010 00:16:45 +0100
Michel Dänzer wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-03-04 at 16:09 -0700, Brian Paul wrote:
> > Jesse Barnes wrote:
> > > Would anyone have objections if these lists moved to freedesktop.org?
> > > The recent thread with Linus about the drm pull request highlights the
> > > po
On Fri, 5 Mar 2010, Dave Airlie wrote:
>
> Its nouveau project not X not DRM, stop generalising the situation.
Is it really just nouveau? I've not looked, but I bet the intel driver and
the radeon driver have _exactly_ the same "oh, I'm the wrong version, I
will now kill myself" behavior.
I
On Thu, 2010-03-04 at 11:14 -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > If you'd made it clear that you wanted the interface to be stable
> > before it got merged, I suspect that it simply wouldn't have been merged
> > until the interface was stable.
>
> What k
On Thu, 2010-03-04 at 16:09 -0700, Brian Paul wrote:
> Jesse Barnes wrote:
> > Would anyone have objections if these lists moved to freedesktop.org?
> > The recent thread with Linus about the drm pull request highlights the
> > post lag and non-subscriber aspect of the current lists, and that
> >
Jesse Barnes wrote:
> Would anyone have objections if these lists moved to freedesktop.org?
> The recent thread with Linus about the drm pull request highlights the
> post lag and non-subscriber aspect of the current lists, and that
> leaves aside sf.net's horrible mail archive interface and poor
>
On Thu, 4 Mar 2010 14:55:29 -0800
Dan Nicholson wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 2:42 PM, Eric Anholt wrote:
> > On Thu, 4 Mar 2010 12:37:23 -0800, Jesse Barnes
> > wrote:
> >> Would anyone have objections if these lists moved to freedesktop.org?
> >> The recent thread with Linus about the drm
On Thu, 4 Mar 2010 14:54:03 -0800 (PST)
Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Stephane Marchesin wrote:
> >
> > In short, the "don't break user space interfaces" principle is making
> > user space code quality worse for everyone. And it makes our lives as
> > graphics developers pret
On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Adam Jackson wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-03-04 at 11:14 -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > > If you'd made it clear that you wanted the interface to be stable
> > > before it got merged, I suspect that it simply wouldn't have been merg
On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 8:54 AM, Linus Torvalds
wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Stephane Marchesin wrote:
>>
>> In short, the "don't break user space interfaces" principle is making
>> user space code quality worse for everyone. And it makes our lives as
>> graphics developers pretty miserable act
On Thu, 2010-03-04 at 17:21 -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> > # sed -i 's/\.*/& nouveau.modeset=0/g' /etc/grub.conf
>
> Never tried this part.
The bug I'm assuming you're referring to is
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=519298
in which you merely remove the nouveau userspace component,
On Thu, 2010-03-04 at 14:32 -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> On 03/04/2010 02:04 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > F-12 continues to ship the -nv driver, which will work fine with any
> > kernel version as long as nouveau is disabled.
>
> FAIL. I actually tried that. Have you? Do you think it is remot
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 2:42 PM, Eric Anholt wrote:
> On Thu, 4 Mar 2010 12:37:23 -0800, Jesse Barnes
> wrote:
>> Would anyone have objections if these lists moved to freedesktop.org?
>> The recent thread with Linus about the drm pull request highlights the
>> post lag and non-subscriber aspect o
On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Stephane Marchesin wrote:
>
> In short, the "don't break user space interfaces" principle is making
> user space code quality worse for everyone. And it makes our lives as
> graphics developers pretty miserable actually
And _my_ point is that if you did a half-way decent job
On 03/04/2010 05:18 PM, Adam Jackson wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-03-04 at 14:32 -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote:
>> On 03/04/2010 02:04 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
>>> F-12 continues to ship the -nv driver, which will work fine with any
>>> kernel version as long as nouveau is disabled.
>>
>> FAIL. I actually t
On Thu, 4 Mar 2010 12:37:23 -0800, Jesse Barnes
wrote:
> Would anyone have objections if these lists moved to freedesktop.org?
> The recent thread with Linus about the drm pull request highlights the
> post lag and non-subscriber aspect of the current lists, and that
> leaves aside sf.net's horri
http://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=26347
--- Comment #20 from Rafał Miłecki 2010-03-04 14:19:43 PST
---
Created an attachment (id=33771)
--> (http://bugs.freedesktop.org/attachment.cgi?id=33771)
drm/radeon/kms: add PM quirk for Asus Radeon HD 3200
Marc: can you try this, please?
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 3:37 PM, Jesse Barnes wrote:
> Would anyone have objections if these lists moved to freedesktop.org?
Yes please!
> The recent thread with Linus about the drm pull request highlights the
> post lag and non-subscriber aspect of the current lists, and that
> leaves aside sf.n
Moving seems like a good idea. The delays here have been very troubling.
--
Mike Stroyan - Software Architect
LunarG, Inc. - The Graphics Experts
Cell: (970) 219-7905
Email: m...@lunarg.com
Website: http://www.lunarg.com
--
> Can we try to make it less of a pain in the ass at some other level?
>
> For example, I realize that it's a real pain - both for the kernel _and_
> for the user space library - to dynamically have to support multiple
> versions of some interface.
>
> And doing it _statically_ (with a compile opti
http://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=26347
--- Comment #19 from Rafał Miłecki 2010-03-04 13:51:04 PST
---
(In reply to comment #15)
> @Rafał Miłecki:
>
> Currently (nearly) everything in PM looks wrong to me.
Uhm.
> First of all the user has no way to configure the power manageme
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 3:37 PM, Jesse Barnes wrote:
> Would anyone have objections if these lists moved to freedesktop.org?
> The recent thread with Linus about the drm pull request highlights the
> post lag and non-subscriber aspect of the current lists, and that
> leaves aside sf.net's horrible
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 7:18 PM, Linus Torvalds
wrote:
>
>
> Hmm. What the hell am I supposed to do about
>
> (II) NOUVEAU(0): [drm] nouveau interface version: 0.0.16
> (EE) NOUVEAU(0): [drm] wrong version, expecting 0.0.15
> (EE) NOUVEAU(0): 879:
>
> now?
You can update your
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 10:21 PM, Maarten Maathuis wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 7:18 PM, Linus Torvalds
> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Hmm. What the hell am I supposed to do about
>>
>> (II) NOUVEAU(0): [drm] nouveau interface version: 0.0.16
>> (EE) NOUVEAU(0): [drm] wrong version, expecting
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 7:18 PM, Linus Torvalds
wrote:
>
>
> Hmm. What the hell am I supposed to do about
>
> (II) NOUVEAU(0): [drm] nouveau interface version: 0.0.16
> (EE) NOUVEAU(0): [drm] wrong version, expecting 0.0.15
> (EE) NOUVEAU(0): 879:
>
> now?
>
> What happened to
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 12:07, Linus Torvalds
wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Matthew Garrett wrote:
>>
>> > IOW, we have a real technical problem here. Are you just going to continue
>> > to make excuses about it?
>>
>> I'm not questioning the fact that it would be preferable to provide
>> compat
On Thu, Mar 04, 2010 at 12:07:19PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> Do you seriously think that that wouldn't make life easier EVEN FOR THOSE
> DEVELOPERS that you claim to speak up for?
Compared to dealing with Mesa's build system? I honestly wouldn't want
to say. But you're right that pushing t
Would anyone have objections if these lists moved to freedesktop.org?
The recent thread with Linus about the drm pull request highlights the
post lag and non-subscriber aspect of the current lists, and that
leaves aside sf.net's horrible mail archive interface and poor
performance.
If spam is an i
http://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=26891
--- Comment #1 from Stefan Dösinger 2010-03-04
12:50:11 PST ---
Oh, I forgot: The Intel DRM driver works just fine with KMS without a bios
image(tested with a GMA 965 aka X3100). On the Nvidia side I have to use the
EFI framebuffer, then sta
http://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=26891
Summary: Radeon KMS on Macs with EFI boot
Product: DRI
Version: XOrg CVS
Platform: Other
OS/Version: All
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: medium
Compo
On Thu, Mar 04, 2010 at 11:41:22AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> Is there some model of versioning inside X _except_ for the "it won't
> work" kind of thing? Can we fix this going forward, so that you can have
> _real_ versioning (ie multiple installed versions of a libdrm, the way you
> can h
On 03/04/2010 02:04 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> "Please note that these drivers are under heavy development, may or may
> not work, and may contain userspace interfaces that most likely will be
> changed in the near future."
Shipping it as the default Fedora driver for NVIDIA hardware makes that
On Thu, Mar 04, 2010 at 11:14:11AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> >
> > If you'd made it clear that you wanted the interface to be stable
> > before it got merged, I suspect that it simply wouldn't have been merged
> > until the interface was st
On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Matthew Garrett wrote:
>
> > IOW, we have a real technical problem here. Are you just going to continue
> > to make excuses about it?
>
> I'm not questioning the fact that it would be preferable to provide
> compatibility. But that compatibility doesn't come for free - som
http://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=25093
Andy Furniss changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|FIXED
http://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=25093
--- Comment #2 from Andy Furniss 2010-03-04
12:06:26 PST ---
Created an attachment (id=33765)
--> (http://bugs.freedesktop.org/attachment.cgi?id=33765)
new cubemap corruption
--
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.freedesktop.org/userprefs.cg
On Fri, 5 Mar 2010, Dave Airlie wrote:
>
> At the moment in Fedora we deal with this for our users, we have
> dependencies between userspace and kernel space and we upgrade the bits
> when they upgrade the kernels, its a pain in the ass, but its what we
> accepted we needed to do to get nouve
On Thu, 4 Mar 2010 11:08:07 -0800 (PST)
Linus Torvalds wrote:
> The thing is, they clearly didn't even _try_ to make anything compatible.
> See how all the ioctl numbers were moved around.
>
> And if you can't make if backwards compatible, at least you should make it
> forwards-compatible. Is
On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Matthew Garrett wrote:
>
> You're asking volunteers who didn't ask for their driver to be merged to
> perform more work in order to support users they didn't ask for.
And _you_ are making excuses for BAD TECHNICAL DECISIONS!
Come on! How hard is it to admit that that the c
http://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=26347
--- Comment #18 from Marc 2010-03-04 11:36:52 PST ---
ah - sorry. I didn't meant the #lanes but the engine clock. dmesg reports 300
and 500 MHz available with 300 MHz default. radeon_pm_info says 500 is default
and I'm using it! this sounds c
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 1:18 PM, Linus Torvalds
wrote:
> but why the hell wasn't I made aware of it before-hand? Quite frankly, I
> probably wouldn't have pulled it.
>From Dave's initial pull request "[git pull] drm merge" from March 1,
he does say
> *NOTE* in case you missed it: this will *break
>>
>> If marking the driver as staging doesn't allow them to break ABI when
>> they need to, then it seems like they'll have no choice but to either
>> remove the driver from upstream and only submit it when the ABI is
>> stable, or fork the driver and submit a new one only when the ABI is
>> stabl
On Thu, Mar 04, 2010 at 10:55:57AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> >
> > When you asked that nouveau was merged, people explicitly told you that
> > the reason it hadn't been was because the interface was unstable and
> > userspace would break. You aske
El mié. 03 de mar. de 2010, a las 23:35:00 +0100, Rafał Miłecki escribió:
> W dniu 3 marca 2010 23:33 użytkownik Rafał Miłecki napisał:
> > This is supposed to check if we receive correct interrupt and if out check
> > for
> > VBLANK is correct. If you get warnings with patch applied, it means we
On Thu, Mar 04, 2010 at 10:51:20AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> That doesn't change the simple basic issue: how are people with Fedora-12
> going to test any kernel out now? And are there libdrm versions that can
> handle _both_ cases, so that people can bisect things? IOW, even if you
> have
On Thu, Mar 04, 2010 at 10:43:30AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> Or is there a version of X that can handle _both_ the 0.0.15 and the
> 0.0.16 interfaces?
When you asked that nouveau was merged, people explicitly told you that
the reason it hadn't been was because the interface was unstable an
http://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=26347
--- Comment #17 from Alex Deucher 2010-03-04 11:23:03 PST ---
(In reply to comment #16)
> r...@ax2-5200p:/sys/kernel/debug/dri/0# cat radeon_pm_info
> state: PM_STATE_ACTIVE
> default engine clock: 50 kHz
> current engine clock: 494040 kH
On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Matthew Garrett wrote:
>
> If you'd made it clear that you wanted the interface to be stable
> before it got merged, I suspect that it simply wouldn't have been merged
> until the interface was stable.
What kind of excuse is that? It's "we did bad things, but if we didn't
On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Jesse Barnes wrote:
>
> If marking the driver as staging doesn't allow them to break ABI when
> they need to, then it seems like they'll have no choice but to either
> remove the driver from upstream and only submit it when the ABI is
> stable, or fork the driver and submit a
On Thu, 4 Mar 2010 10:36:55 -0800
Jesse Barnes wrote:
> Yes Dave probably should have mentioned it in his pull request, but
> that doesn't seem to be a good reason not to pull imo...
And now I see Dave did mention this, so what gives. Guidance please.
--
Jesse Barnes, Intel Open Source Technol
On Thu, 4 Mar 2010 10:18:03 -0800 (PST)
Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
>
> Hmm. What the hell am I supposed to do about
>
> (II) NOUVEAU(0): [drm] nouveau interface version: 0.0.16
> (EE) NOUVEAU(0): [drm] wrong version, expecting 0.0.15
> (EE) NOUVEAU(0): 879:
>
> now?
>
> What h
On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> But none of that changes my basic objections. I didn't ask for nouveau to
> be merged as staging - I asked it to be merged because a major distro uses
> it.
Put another way: the issue of whether _I_ happen to see this personally or
not is kind of
On Thu, 4 Mar 2010 10:51:20 -0800 (PST)
Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Jesse Barnes wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 4 Mar 2010 10:36:55 -0800
> > Jesse Barnes wrote:
> > > Yes Dave probably should have mentioned it in his pull request, but
> > > that doesn't seem to be a good reason not
On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Matthew Garrett wrote:
>
> When you asked that nouveau was merged, people explicitly told you that
> the reason it hadn't been was because the interface was unstable and
> userspace would break. You asked that it be merged anyway, and now
> you're unhappy because the interf
On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Jesse Barnes wrote:
> On Thu, 4 Mar 2010 10:36:55 -0800
> Jesse Barnes wrote:
> > Yes Dave probably should have mentioned it in his pull request, but
> > that doesn't seem to be a good reason not to pull imo...
>
> And now I see Dave did mention this, so what gives. Guidan
On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Jesse Barnes wrote:
>
> Whoa, so breaking ABI in staging drivers isn't ok? Lots of other
> staging drivers are shipped by distros with compatible userspaces, but I
> thought the whole point of staging was to fix up ABIs before they
> became mainstream and had backwards compa
On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> I see the commit that does this was very aware of it:
>
> commit a1606a9596e54da90ad6209071b357a4c1b0fa82
> Author: Ben Skeggs
> Date: Fri Feb 12 10:27:35 2010 +1000
>
> drm/nouveau: new gem pushbuf interface, bump to
Hmm. What the hell am I supposed to do about
(II) NOUVEAU(0): [drm] nouveau interface version: 0.0.16
(EE) NOUVEAU(0): [drm] wrong version, expecting 0.0.15
(EE) NOUVEAU(0): 879:
now?
What happened to the whole backwards compatibility thing? I wasn't even
warned that t
http://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=26347
--- Comment #16 from Marc 2010-03-04 09:58:33 PST ---
output of lspci -vnn
01:05.0 VGA compatible controller [0300]: ATI Technologies Inc Radeon HD 3200
Graphics [1002:9610]
Subsystem: ASUSTeK Computer Inc. Device [1043:82f1]
On Thu, 4 Mar 2010 16:25:55 +0800
Zhenyu Wang wrote:
> From: Zhao Yakui
>
> Now the EDID property will be updated when the corresponding EDID can be
> obtained from the external display device. But after the external device
> is plugged-out, the EDID property is not updated. In such case we st
http://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=26887
--- Comment #1 from Marc 2010-03-04 07:53:12 PST ---
Created an attachment (id=33759)
--> (http://bugs.freedesktop.org/attachment.cgi?id=33759)
full dmesg output
--
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.freedesktop.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--
http://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=26887
Summary: fence errors with rs785 and kernel 2.6.33
Product: DRI
Version: DRI CVS
Platform: x86-64 (AMD64)
OS/Version: Linux (All)
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priori
http://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=26347
--- Comment #15 from Tobias Jakobi 2010-03-04 05:24:20
PST ---
@Rafał Miłecki:
Currently (nearly) everything in PM looks wrong to me.
First of all the user has no way to configure the power management. I can't
force the card into low-power
http://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12282
--- Comment #6 from Shawn Starr 2010-03-04 04:26:46
PST ---
I'm not convinced this is r3xx specific, my r6xx with glxgears running alone
shows 80-90% CPU usage and this is with mesa git master.
2685 spstarr 20 0 338m 5132 2324 R 86.3
http://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=26715
--- Comment #4 from Donald Jankins 2010-03-04 02:39:22
PST ---
Perhaps I figured out when it happens.
When I run VirtualBox virtual machine with accelerated 3D graphics enabled and
shutdown it normally (at least 3-4 times), the bug occurs. I
On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 05:50:10PM +0100, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> This patch change the TTM API to allow driver to select btw choosing
> to wait or not either for bo reserve or GPU wait separately. This is
> needed for the unmappabled VRAM work.
>
> Comments ?
>
> Cheers,
> Jerome
Thomas any chan
> Now my question is if / how I can disable this white-screen.
I also noticed that when the screen-saver from the Linux framebuffer text
console activates itself, it also turns fully white (and not black, like the
"pure" linux text console (the non-framebuffer one).
Any ideas?
--
http://www.h
> the whitescreen you encounter is probably a bug.
> to get further with debugging this:
> try to restart with i915 and fbcon built into the kernel and modesetting
> switched on (in your .config or via kernel commandline: i915.modeset=1 )
> as well as the kernel commandline drm.debug=12 (probably n
http://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12282
--- Comment #5 from Dymchenko Bogdan 2010-03-04 01:44:46
PST ---
sorry, i forgot to say that my videocard is Radeon Mobility X2300
--
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.freedesktop.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this ma
http://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12282
--- Comment #4 from Dymchenko Bogdan 2010-03-04 01:43:12
PST ---
Hi. I have notebook, and I see that FPS of 3d applications depend on speed of
cpu. When i run glxgears i see
5673 frames in 5.0 seconds = 1134.531 FPS
and glxgears use over 30
From: Zhao Yakui
Now the EDID property will be updated when the corresponding EDID can be
obtained from the external display device. But after the external device
is plugged-out, the EDID property is not updated. In such case we still
get the corresponding EDID property although it is already det
99 matches
Mail list logo
