On Sat, 2004-09-04 at 16:36 -0400, Patrick McFarland wrote:
On Sat, 04 Sep 2004 14:14:55 -0400, Michel Dnzer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What version of the DRI driver?
Where do I look for that?
Where did you get r200_dri.so from?
--
Earthling Michel Dnzer | Debian (powerpc), X and
On Sat, 4 Sep 2004 11:59:12 +0100 (IST), Dave Airlie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Can you insmod the radeon drm module with drm_opts=debug do the test and
send on the trace, it may be getting wedged somewhere unexpected...
Here you go, but it doesn't look like it has output anything interesting.
Dave Airlie wrote:
It's one of the major successes I feel of the DRI project, those
snapshots allowed people with Radeon IGP chipsets to get 3d acceleration
long before now (they still can't get it any current distro)
Not quite right -- Gentoo has xorg 6.7.99.x snapshots.
Donnie
On Sad, 2004-09-04 at 19:03, Jon Smirl wrote:
This does add some work to the BSD developers but it would make all of
the new code that doesn't copy preexisting GPL code fair game. I have
no problem marking any new code I write as being BSD licensed, I just
don't want to rewrite 80,000 lines of
On Sun, 05 Sep 2004 13:07:37 +0100, Alan Cox [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sad, 2004-09-04 at 19:03, Jon Smirl wrote:
This does add some work to the BSD developers but it would make all of
the new code that doesn't copy preexisting GPL code fair game. I have
no problem marking any new code I
On Sul, 2004-09-05 at 16:05, Jon Smirl wrote:
If DRI stays the way it is currently licensed no problems arise anyway
(beyond proprietary people reusing DRI code, which given the license is
presumably the intent)
If I copy GPL pieces of fbdev in to the DRM drivers it will pollute
the BSD
On Sun, 05 Sep 2004 15:15:25 +0100, Alan Cox [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sul, 2004-09-05 at 16:05, Jon Smirl wrote:
If DRI stays the way it is currently licensed no problems arise anyway
(beyond proprietary people reusing DRI code, which given the license is
presumably the intent)
On Sul, 2004-09-05 at 16:33, Jon Smirl wrote:
Then how am I going to merge fbdev and DRM so that we don't have two
drivers fighting over the same hardware?
Everyone else in the discussions but you seemed to have no plans to
merge them, yet you keep going back to that plan and ignoring the
On Sul, 2004-09-05 at 15:44, Alan Cox wrote:
On Sul, 2004-09-05 at 16:33, Jon Smirl wrote:
Then how am I going to merge fbdev and DRM so that we don't have two
drivers fighting over the same hardware?
Everyone else in the discussions but you seemed to have no plans to
merge them, yet you
On Sul, 2004-09-05 at 17:05, Jon Smirl wrote:
They have to be merged. Cards with two heads need the mode set on each
head. fbdev only sets the mode on one head. If I teach fbdev how to
set the mode of the other head fbdev needs to learn about memory
management. The DRM memory management code
CC [M] /opt/drm/linux/i810_drv.o
In file included from /opt/drm/linux/i810_drv.c:46:
/opt/drm/linux/drm_drv.h: In function `i810_release':
/opt/drm/linux/drm_drv.h:974: error: structure has no member named
`free_filp_private'
/opt/drm/linux/drm_drv.h:975: error: structure has no member named
Please do not reply to this email: if you want to comment on the bug, go to
the URL shown below and enter yourcomments there.
https://freedesktop.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1003
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
The only glue structure you need for most of this is
struct fb_device
{
struct fb_info *fb; /* NULL or frame buffer device */
struct dri_whatever *dri; /* As yet not nicely extracted DRI
object */
atomic_t refcnt;
void
Transmeta Efficeon Cluster ontop and under the desk running Linux;-)
96 CPUs in one (large) desktop workstation
http://arstechnica.com/news/posts/20040830-4142.html
Official announcement (Press Release):
http://www.orionmulti.com/news/press?sid=049af0ecd126eebbce765f1f0f95ba7a
Products:
On Sunday, September 5, 2004 8:31 am, Alan Cox wrote:
The only glue structure you need for most of this is
struct fb_device
{
struct fb_info *fb; /* NULL or frame buffer device */
struct dri_whatever *dri; /* As yet not nicely extracted DRI
object */
atomic_t refcnt;
void
On Sun, 05 Sep 2004 13:40:54 -0400, Michel Dänzer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, 2004-09-05 at 04:22 -0400, Patrick McFarland wrote:
On Sun, 05 Sep 2004 02:34:59 -0400, Michel Dänzer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Where did you get r200_dri.so from?
From the one that comes with the Deb X
On Sun, 2004-09-05 at 16:18 -0400, Patrick McFarland wrote:
On Sun, 05 Sep 2004 13:40:54 -0400, Michel Dnzer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, 2004-09-05 at 04:22 -0400, Patrick McFarland wrote:
On Sun, 05 Sep 2004 02:34:59 -0400, Michel Dnzer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Where did you
Sure you can use this to get around both fbdev and DRM trying to claim
the resource. But it doesn't help at all to fix the problem that fbdev
and DRM are programming the radeon chip in conflicting ways.
Look at the case of two independent users, one logged into each head.
One is running DRI and
On Sun, 05 Sep 2004 16:25:00 -0400, Michel Dänzer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, 2004-09-05 at 16:18 -0400, Patrick McFarland wrote:
That shouldn't matter, should it? The userland stuff should never lock
the machine up.
In an ideal world... Feel free to track down the cause and add code
On Sul, 2004-09-05 at 22:12, Jon Smirl wrote:
Sure you can use this to get around both fbdev and DRM trying to claim
the resource. But it doesn't help at all to fix the problem that fbdev
and DRM are programming the radeon chip in conflicting ways.
Once you have the common structure the rest
On Sul, 2004-09-05 at 23:11, Jon Smirl wrote:
What is the advantage to continuing a development model where two
groups of programmers work independently, with little coordination on
two separate code bases trying to simultaneously control the same
piece of hardware? This is a continuous source
On Sun, 2004-09-05 at 16:18, Patrick McFarland wrote:
On Sun, 05 Sep 2004 13:40:54 -0400, Michel Dänzer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, 2004-09-05 at 04:22 -0400, Patrick McFarland wrote:
On Sun, 05 Sep 2004 02:34:59 -0400, Michel Dänzer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Where did you get
On Fri, 2004-09-03 at 17:03 +0200, Luca Zini wrote:
I have an ati 9000 on a asus a7n8x-x.
the direct rendering works well, and I can use glxgears, celestia and
some other application that need it, but a lot of games don't work.
For example when I try to start tuxracer the screen goes black
Please do not reply to this email: if you want to comment on the bug, go to
the URL shown below and enter yourcomments there.
https://freedesktop.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1220
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-09-05 18:22 ---
The only
Please do not reply to this email: if you want to comment on the bug, go to
the URL shown below and enter yourcomments there.
https://freedesktop.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1289
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
25 matches
Mail list logo
