Date: Thu, 23 Feb 1995 16:53:49 -0500 (EST) From: Jeff Hoffman <jeffh@cybernetics.net> To: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@freefall.cdrom.com> Cc: current@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: UPDATE: Imagine128 & AccelX & 950210-SNAP Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.950223165021.420A-100000@server0> In-Reply-To: <11566.793571054@freefall.cdrom.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 23 Feb 1995, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote:
> > Ok, for those of you who have been keeping up, I tried to re-install 2.0
> > and ended up back with 950210-SNAP because my floppy didn't work with
> > 2.0 This time, I ftp'ed the the 950210-SNAP from scratch, and did not
> > use one single non-950210-SNAP file (except my X server).
>
> [FYI - either -hackers OR -current, but never both. I have adjusted
> the CC line. Thank you]
Oops, sorry. Thanks.
> > I run Xsetup again, choose Number9 I128 w/4MB, same resolution, same
> > color depth (16 colors). I load up X, and things are no longer OK.
> > Before I go into depth with the problems, let me say that I ran this
> > server under 2.0 for a while (about a month) with 0 problems. I have not
> > done one thing to my machine since then. It is _EXACTLY_ the same as it
> > was then. _Something_ that was changed between 2.0 and 950210-SNAP is
> > causing this problem, either directly or indirectly. I will let the
> > XInside people know tomorrow, as well.
>
> I'm sorry, but this is just frankly bizarre. I can't think of
> anything except perhaps the mmap() semantics changing (David?) that
> would lead to semantics like you're describing. The X server should
> still be communicating just fine with the board's registers and video
> memory under either 2.0 or 950210-SNAP, and I've certainly been
> running Xaccel quite happily since pre-2.0 days all the way up to
> post-950210-SNAP with my #9 GXE64 Pro/4MB board. It's never given me
> anything but flawless performance.
I know. I never had any problems with 2.0 either. The board ran
flawlessly and I thought I had died and gone to heaven. Now, it's a
different story however.
> I presume that you have, of course, tried varying resolutions, pixel
> depths, etc? You really will have to help us narrow this down a
> little more if we're to have any hope of tracking it down and fixing
> it.
Yes, I tried all resolutions supported by my board, as well as each color
depth. It is worth noting that this problem only occurs when the I128 is
selected. By using either the cirrus logic driver or the standard IBM
VGA, 256k driver things are fine (no problems.) The second I switch to
the I128, though, things begin going mad. This is true for 640x480x16
all the way up to 1600x1200x16bit.
I am in contact with the people at XInside and will let you guys know if
I come up with anything new from them. If you can think of anything new
I can tell them to help them find and fix the problem then by all means
e-mail me. I will do anything I can to help all parties involved get the
problem fixed.
> Jordan
Jeff
-- Jeff Hoffman -- jeffh@cybernetics.net -------------------------------------
"A man facing the light looks not into sorrow, but to to the future...always."
WWW: http://www.cybernetics.net/users/jeffh
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PGP Public Key available on request.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.SUN.3.91.950223165021.420A-100000>