On Sat, 9 Feb 2002, Egbert Eich wrote:

> > So it seems some change to the accel code that occured between 
> > 4.1.0 and 4.2.0 is overwriting the hardware mouse cursor image in 
> > video memory.  That's my best guess anyway.  Any comments from 
> > someone who has worked on the code previously would be greatly 
> > appreciated.
>
>Look at sis530_accel.c, locate the line:
>topFB = (pSiS->maxxfbmem >= pSiS->FbMapSize - offset) ?
>change the ">=" to "<"

Ok, thanks Egbert, will do.


> > When looking at the source code for the driver I see:
> > 
> >     /* TW: ---EGBERT: Remove this before committing !*/
> >     xf86DrvMsg(pScrn->scrnIndex, X_PROBED,
> >            "Unofficial driver (16.01.02) by Thomas Winischhofer\n");
> > 
> > 
> > So those lines should probably be removed from sis_driver.c and
> > committed to xf-4_2-branch and head also.  Might even be a good
> > idea to have Thomas just not include such string at all.  If the
> > purpose is to distinguish between official XFree86 driver
> > releases and non official, it isn't doing well.  ;o)
> > 
>
>Indeed I didn't notice this line in the rush to get this driver
>out. This can happen - can't it? 

Absolutely.


> > (==) SIS(0): Silken mouse enabled
> > (II) SIS(0): direct rendering disabled
> > (WW) SIS(0): Option "swsursor" is not used
> > (II) Setting vga for screen 0.
> > (II) Initializing built-in extension MIT-SHM
>
>There is a very simple answer:
>The driver doesn't know an option "swsursor" only "swcursor".

Hahahaha.  Didn't see that.  I figured something was missing
there, so I went hunting.  ;o)  I grepped the tree for sursor and
found nothing so, must be a typo in the config file somewhere I
guess.


> > ===============================================================
> > 
> > Another thing I noticed is:
> > 
> > (--) SIS(0): Video BIOS version ĖVer  1 detected
> >                                 ^^^^
>
>This is a string returned by the BIOS.  As this part of the code
>works well for almost everybody else I suspect that the driver
>doesn't stick to the VESA conventions. If anybody feels bothered
>he/she should complain to the BIOS Vendor.

Personally I have no idea weter it was a driver or BIOS fault.  I 
just thought that reporting all of my findings in a report to you 
all at once would be a useful bug report that might help improve 
the SiS driver.  Since I don't have the hardware myself, nor the 
specs, I can only nosey through the code using config files and 
log files people have contributed and play guessing games.  

You're much more familiar with the driver, so I figured you would 
appreciate a detailed bug report with any odd looking findings 
encountered.  I hope you didn't take any of it as a complaint, 
as it was not intended as such.  Just pointing out observations 
to try and help improve the driver.

I'll make that change to the driver and provide you with 
feedback I receive from users.

Thanks again Egbert,
TTYL

-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Mike A. Harris                  Shipping/mailing address:
OS Systems Engineer             190 Pittsburgh Ave., Sault Ste. Marie,
XFree86 maintainer              Ontario, Canada, P6C 5B3
Red Hat Inc.                    Phone: (705)949-2136
http://www.redhat.com           ftp://people.redhat.com/mharris
Red Hat XFree86 mailing list:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
General open IRC discussion:    #xfree86 on irc.openprojects.net
----------------------------------------------------------------------

_______________________________________________
Xpert mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xpert

Reply via email to