Bug#369167: DRI probably broken: where to reportbug
daenzer at debian.org
Sat Oct 14 02:47:51 PDT 2006
On Fri, 2006-10-13 at 18:21 -0400, David Nusinow wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 13, 2006 at 08:39:34AM +0200, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> > On Mon, 2006-06-12 at 20:19 -0400, David Nusinow wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jun 12, 2006 at 08:26:53AM +0200, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> > > > On Sun, 2006-06-11 at 17:45 -0400, David Nusinow wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Should we ship our driver with this patch as well?
> > > >
> > > > Eventually, yes, but I'm not sure it's correct for integrated chipsets
> > > > as is.
> > >
> > > Ok, let me know. I actually have an IGP 340M here that I can test on if
> > > that's sufficient to make you feel more confident in it.
> > Oh, yes, would be awesome if you could test whether this patch has any
> > impact wrt DRI on that. At any rate though, please provide a full
> > logfile from running with this patch.
> Ok, so I finally got my notebook up and running again, and tested the patch
> with the latest driver. It worked fine both with fb enabled and without.
> I've attached the server logs for both.
Thanks, but it looks like the patch wasn't applied correctly; there
should be a line like
(II) RADEON(0): Detected total video RAM=131072K, accessible=131072K (PCI BAR=131072K)
(--) RADEON(0): Mapped VideoRAM: 32768 kByte (64 bit DDR SDRAM)
in both logs, but it's not in either.
> It's worth noting that using the framebuffer was insanely slow in comparison to
> not using, although I don't know if this is normal or not.
Looks like it doesn't enable write-combining for some reason with it
> I'm committing the patch to our svn repo now, let me know if
> you want me to upload it to unstable.
It should actually be tested first. :) Although AFAIK Fabio applied it
to the Ubuntu package a while ago and hasn't reported any regressions.
Earthling Michel Dänzer | http://tungstengraphics.com
Libre software enthusiast | Debian, X and DRI developer
More information about the Xorg-driver-ati