On Gwe, 2003-08-01 at 23:54, Michel Dnzer wrote:
On Fri, 2003-08-01 at 18:33, Ian Romanick wrote:
This does make one subtle, but VERY important change to the policy
carried out by the driver's init function. Right now all of the drivers
will try to run even if they don't recognize
On Thu, Jul 31, 2003 at 09:02:08AM -0700, Ian Romanick wrote:
Keith Whitwell wrote:
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
Sven Luther wrote:
On Thu, Jul 31, 2003 at 09:02:08AM -0700, Ian Romanick wrote:
Keith Whitwell wrote:
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
BTW, what about the drm modules, do they recognize the hardware also, or
do they not care about being loaded or not.
I think they check, but I'm not sure. I'd have to look.
I don't think so. The FreeBSD varients have a table of pci ids, but that's
got a lot to do with the FreeBSD device
On Fri, 2003-08-01 at 18:33, Ian Romanick wrote:
This does make one subtle, but VERY important change to the policy
carried out by the driver's init function. Right now all of the drivers
will try to run even if they don't recognize the PCI ID. If we go
this route, that will change.
Ian Romanick wrote:
Sven Luther wrote:
On Thu, Jul 31, 2003 at 09:02:08AM -0700, Ian Romanick wrote:
Keith Whitwell wrote:
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
On Thu, 2003-07-31 at 07:49, Ian Romanick wrote:
Michel Dnzer wrote:
On Wed, 2003-07-30 at 03:06, Ian Romanick wrote:
[...] 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
Ian Romanick wrote:
Michel Dnzer wrote:
On Wed, 2003-07-30 at 03:06, Ian Romanick wrote:
Antoine REVERSAT wrote:
I just compiled dri from the CVS for my radeon 9000 Mobbility card
(r250 lf) and it wont work as good as it is expected to (I.E : 30
fps in Quake3) The thing is when i do a
Keith Whitwell wrote:
Ian Romanick wrote:
Michel Dnzer 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
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
On Wed, 2003-07-30 at 03:06, Ian Romanick wrote:
Antoine REVERSAT wrote:
I just compiled dri from the CVS for my radeon 9000 Mobbility card (r250 lf) and
it wont work as good as it is expected to (I.E : 30 fps in Quake3) The thing is
when i do a glxinfo it is reported as a r200 chip
Michel Dnzer wrote:
On Wed, 2003-07-30 at 03:06, Ian Romanick wrote:
Antoine REVERSAT wrote:
I just compiled dri from the CVS for my radeon 9000 Mobbility card (r250 lf) and it
wont work as good as it is expected to (I.E : 30 fps in Quake3) The thing is when i do
a glxinfo it is reported as
Antoine REVERSAT wrote:
I just compiled dri from the CVS for my radeon 9000 Mobbility card (r250 lf) and it
wont work as good as it is expected to (I.E : 30 fps in Quake3) The thing is when i do
a glxinfo it is reported as a r200 chip which it isn't... So i'd like to know if you
are aware of
13 matches
Mail list logo
