Dave> John Stoffel wrote: >> What happens if you put back in the 58xx card and clear out the >> Monitor section from your xorg.conf file completely? Let the KMS >> figure out the monitor settings on it's own? Do you get the screwy >> pink line then?
Dave> The HD 5750 gives me the pink line before X even runs! The Dave> problem, I believe, lies with the HDMI support in the Evergreen Dave> DRM code. I am not the only Evergreen user to be affected by Dave> this. Ahh, then never mind my suggestion. It's obviously a more low-level issue, probably in the AtomBIOS parsing layer. Dave> Just for kicks, I removed xorg.conf completely. The Xorg.0.log Dave> files produced were barely different: the changes mostly have to Dave> do with autodetection of Default Screen and loss of Monitor Dave> sections. Interestingly, the removal of the Monitor sections Dave> causes this change in the Xorg.0.log output: Dave> -(**) RADEON(0): Display dimensions: (593, 371) mm Dave> -(**) RADEON(0): DPI set to (82, 82) Dave> +(==) RADEON(0): DPI set to (96, 96) Dave> The first two lines are expected, since I removed the monitor section Dave> that specified the physical size of the monitor. The line replacing Dave> them ought to be indicating a DPI of 82 since the correct resolution and Dave> screen size are detected: Dave> (II) RADEON(0): clock: 154.0 MHz Image Size: 593 x 371 mm Dave> Instead, either the radeon driver or the X server is altering the Dave> physical screen size to this: Dave> (II) RADEON(0): Setting screen physical size to 508 x 317 Dave> This also happens with my HD 4850 (even with my old xorg.conf Dave> being used) if I use the DVI-to-HDMI converter cable. With the Dave> new HDMI cable being used (on HD 4850), I get the correct Dave> physical size: 593x371. Dave> Baffling.... Not really, look at the change in DPI. I bet that's the difference between the 82 and 96 DPI settings. >> Good lukc, and thanks for all your testing. I'm slowly getting >> tempted to upgrade from my x1650 card. :] Dave> Thanks. I purchased the HD 5750 knowing that Linux open driver Dave> support would be lousy or nonexistent. Or, stated another way, Dave> I knew that support was being newly introduced, and it was my Dave> big chance to contribute by testing the new support as it is Dave> developed! I understand! I wish I had the time to get into the programming deeper, but work and family are keeping me limited. John _______________________________________________ xorg-driver-ati mailing list [email protected] http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-driver-ati
