Ian Romanick wrote:
Michel Dänzer wrote:
On Wed, 2003-07-30 at 03:06, Ian Romanick wrote:
Here's a patch that should clear some of that up, at least for the R200-family of chips. I did change the code to include xf86PciInfo.h. In spite of the comment there, it doesn't seem to produce any errors. Is this a safe change to make? Also, do we really need to check the device ID against R100-family IDs in the R200 driver?
Apparently, people do try to use the wrong drivers on the Mesa embedded and whatnot branches...
How can that be? The user has to select which 3D driver to use (i.e., the 2D driver doesn't select it for them)? What's to stop someone with an R200 from "selecting" the MGA driver?
There's no 2D driver.
That makes sense. Duh.
It would be simple to add some checking to ensure the chipid is recognized by the 3d driver, just hasn't been done yet.
Let me work up a patch that does this in a more generally way. The current big switch-statement is somewhat unpleasant. Do the embedded drivers have a header file where they get PCI IDs? I assume that xf86PciInfo.h is not available. :)
------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email sponsored by: Free pre-built ASP.NET sites including Data Reports, E-commerce, Portals, and Forums are available now. Download today and enter to win an XBOX or Visual Studio .NET. http://aspnet.click-url.com/go/psa00100003ave/direct;at.aspnet_072303_01/01 _______________________________________________ Dri-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel
