seventh guardian wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 16, 2008 at 4:17 PM, Brian Paul
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> seventh guardian wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> I'm running a 64 bit kernel and using the gallium branch from the
>>> nouveau repository. It's being kept mostly synchronized with your
>>> gallium branch, so this problem should also apply.
>>>
>>> Everything works (mostly) fine with 64 bits apps, but for 32 bit apps
>>> rendering obviously reverts to software mode. So I wanted to build a
>>> 32 bit version of the libraries to be able to use hardware rendering
>>> (this setup works for the nividia blob), but then things started to go
>>> wrong ;)
>>>
>>> First of all, the "-m32" flag is not being used in some of the demos
>>> so gcc complains that I want to link 32 bit code into a 64 bit
>>> executable. I had to add $(ARCH_FLAGS) to some lines in
>>> progs/demos/Makefile for mesa to compile. I'm not sure if this is the
>>> right solution, but a patch goes on annex for this.
>> It doesn't look like you're using Mesa from git.  At least your patch
>> doesn't apply there.
> 
> I'm using origin/gallium-0.1. That's the base for all the current 3d
> nouveau work..

Sorry, I missed where you wrote that before.  I'll apply your Makefile 
patch.


>>> After this and some other small tweaks it compiled fine. I have a
>>> "multi-lib" setup with all the necessary xorg 32 bit libs.
>>>
>>> Unfortunately, I'm still not getting direct rendering for 32 bit apps.
>>> Can I be doing something wrong? Or is this not expected to work at
>>> all?
>> I think you'll have to provide more details.  Does setting
>> LIBGL_DEBUG=verbose give any hints?
> 
> For some strange reason the app was trying to use the 64 bit libGL.so.
> I've fixed that, thanks!
> 
> Now I get 90% syslog-ng cpu usage, and checking the logs I get a lot of these:
> 
> (...)
> Jun 16 16:55:09 pinguinus [drm:drm_unlocked_ioctl] *ERROR* ret = 48 -12
> (...)
> 
> I'm not sure if this concerns mesa anymore, I'll try to check with the
> nouveau drm guys.
> 
>>> As a final comment, I found the build system way too complicated. I
>>> had to tweak the config files a lot, and the used hierarchy duplicates
>>> stuff all over the place. I would definitely prefer having a properly
>>> setup auto-tools environment. Don't take me wrong, I know that some
>>> people don't like auto-tools for several reasons, and in the end it is
>>> a matter of preference.
>> We've had autoconf for a while now.  Try the 7.1 release candidate or get
>> the current code from git.
> 
> Oh, I see that the master branch has autoconf. Are there any plans to
> use autoconf for the origin/gallium-0.1 branch?

No plans for now.  Too busy w/ other things.

Feel free to try bringing it over yourself.

-Brian

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php
_______________________________________________
Mesa3d-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mesa3d-dev

Reply via email to