Keith Whitwell wrote:
Ian Romanick wrote:
Michel Dänzer wrote:
On Tue, 2003-07-29 at 22:41, Ian Romanick wrote:
1. I don't like the hard-coding of 2*1024*1024 as the size of the
indirect buffers. This was copied directly from the R200 driver,
but I don't like it. We may want to change the size
On Tue, 05 Aug 2003 09:52:25 -0700
Ian Romanick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Keith Whitwell wrote:
> > Ian Romanick wrote:
> >> Michel Dänzer wrote:
> >>> On Tue, 2003-07-29 at 22:41, Ian Romanick wrote:
> >>>
> 1. I don't like the hard-coding of 2*1024*1024 as the size of the
> indirec
Michel Dänzer wrote:
On Tue, 2003-08-05 at 18:52, Ian Romanick wrote:
Keith Whitwell wrote:
Ian Romanick wrote:
Michel Dänzer wrote:
On Tue, 2003-07-29 at 22:41, Ian Romanick wrote:
1. I don't like the hard-coding of 2*1024*1024 as the size of the
indirect buffers. This was copied directly
On Thu, 2003-08-07 at 21:57, Ian Romanick wrote:
> Michel Dänzer wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 2003-08-05 at 18:52, Ian Romanick wrote:
> >
> >>Michel, does that INREG work for PCIGART as well?
> >
> > No, good point, you need
> >
> > INREG( RADEON_AIC_LO_ADDR ) + dri_priv->agpTexOffset
> >
> > for tha
On Fri, 2003-08-08 at 22:40, Ian Romanick wrote:
> Michel Dänzer wrote:
> > On Thu, 2003-08-07 at 21:57, Ian Romanick wrote:
> >>Michel Dänzer wrote:
> >>>On Tue, 2003-08-05 at 18:52, Ian Romanick wrote:
> >>>
> Michel, does that INREG work for PCIGART as well?
> >>>
> >>>No, good point, you ne
Michel Dänzer wrote:
On Thu, 2003-08-07 at 21:57, Ian Romanick wrote:
Michel Dänzer wrote:
On Tue, 2003-08-05 at 18:52, Ian Romanick wrote:
Michel, does that INREG work for PCIGART as well?
No, good point, you need
INREG( RADEON_AIC_LO_ADDR ) + dri_priv->agpTexOffset
for that.
Okay, that would b
Ian Romanick wrote:
Michel Dänzer wrote:
On Tue, 2003-07-29 at 22:41, Ian Romanick wrote:
1. I don't like the hard-coding of 2*1024*1024 as the size of the
indirect buffers. This was copied directly from the R200 driver, but
I don't like it. We may want to change the size of this buffer at
s
Michel Dänzer wrote:
On Tue, 2003-07-29 at 22:41, Ian Romanick wrote:
1. I don't like the hard-coding of 2*1024*1024 as the size of the
indirect buffers. This was copied directly from the R200 driver, but I
don't like it. We may want to change the size of this buffer at some
point, and hard
On Tue, 2003-07-29 at 22:41, Ian Romanick wrote:
>
> 1. I don't like the hard-coding of 2*1024*1024 as the size of the
> indirect buffers. This was copied directly from the R200 driver, but I
> don't like it. We may want to change the size of this buffer at some
> point, and hard-coding the
Ian Romanick wrote:
Jérôme Marant wrote:
Michel Dänzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Yes, like that. And fishes appear as rectangles, as well as
trees.
BTW, does setting RADEON_AGPTEXTURING_FORCE_DISABLE work around it? If
so, Ian is working on fixing it.
I've tried export RADEON_AGPTEXTURING
Am 2003.07.29 22:41:30 +0200 schrieb(en) Ian Romanick:
...
>
> 2. I don't like the hackish handing of the pre-1.3 DRM case. Are there
> other PCI IDs that need the 128MB offset? Do we even support the
> pre-1.3 DRM anymore? If we don't support the pre-1.3 DRM (and don't
> intend to fix the s
Jérôme Marant wrote:
Michel Dänzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Yes, like that. And fishes appear as rectangles, as well as
trees.
BTW, does setting RADEON_AGPTEXTURING_FORCE_DISABLE work around it? If
so, Ian is working on fixing it.
I've tried export RADEON_AGPTEXTURING_FORCE_DISABLE=1 and it
12 matches
Mail list logo
