I have been searching the list archive to find a solution for my problem. Enabling 3D in sax2 doesn't work. I see in several messages that this has been discussed a lot so I would only like to ask if my understanding of all this is correct. Am I correct in the following? 1. 3D will not work with SuSE 9.0 out of the box? 2. I need ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/i386/supplementary/X/XFree86/ATI/suse90/fglrx/3.7.6/ to get this working? 3. issues are as stated in README from item 2? Damon Register
On Wednesday 28 April 2004 18:31, Damon Register wrote:
I have been searching the list archive to find a solution for my problem. Enabling 3D in sax2 doesn't work. I see in several messages that this has been discussed a lot so I would only like to ask if my understanding of all this is correct.
Am I correct in the following? 1. 3D will not work with SuSE 9.0 out of the box?
Correct. Been there done that.
2. I need ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/i386/supplementary/X/XFree86/ATI/suse90/f glrx/3.7.6/ to get this working?
Yep.. Follow the readme. Then reboot your machine.
3. issues are as stated in README from item 2?
Not sure what those are. Mine worked just fine. Just upgraded to a 9600pro and went through it again. 3d is working fine. Mike -- Powered by SuSE 9.0 Kernel 2.4.21 KDE 3.1.5 Kmail 1.5.4 For SuSE Mondo/Mindi backup support go to http://www.mikenjane.net/~mike 7:21pm up 2 days 22:40, 4 users, load average: 1.00, 1.11, 1.16
Mike wrote:
On Wednesday 28 April 2004 18:31, Damon Register wrote:
2. I need ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/i386/supplementary/X/XFree86/ATI/suse90/f glrx/3.7.6/ to get this working?
Yep.. Follow the readme. Then reboot your machine. did that but still it isn't working correctly.
3. issues are as stated in README from item 2?
Not sure what those are. Mine worked just fine. Just upgraded to a only 24 bit color and no 3D through sax2
I have been browsing through old messages and SuSE support and found that glxinfo and 3Ddiag were suggested. dregist6:~ # glxinfo name of display: :0.0 display: :0 screen: 0 direct rendering: No server glx vendor string: SGI and dregist6:~ # 3Ddiag --dri 3Ddiag version 0.703 Verifying DRI/XFree86 4.x configuration Using 3Ddiag.dri ************************************************************ Verifying 3D configuration based on XFree86 4 for 3D board "ATI Radeon (1002@5961)": Test for correct XFree86 version ... done. Tests for XFree86 configuration: Config File /etc/X11/XF86Config ... done. Driver ... failed! ================================================================ 3D Hardware acceleration is not used. To use 3D Hardware acceleration please specify the entry Driver "radeon" in the Section "Device" of your /etc/X11/XF86Config. Isn't the driver supposed to be fglrx? In /var/log/XFree86.0.log I see some suspicious things (II) fglrx(0): driver needs XFree86 version: 4.3.x (II) fglrx(0): detected XFree86 version: 4.3.0 (II) Loading extension ATIFGLRXDRI (II) fglrx(0): doing DRIScreenInit drmOpenDevice: minor is 0 drmOpenDevice: node name is /dev/dri/card0 drmOpenDevice: open result is -1, (No such device) drmOpenDevice: open result is -1, (No such device) drmOpenDevice: Open failed drmOpenDevice: minor is 0 drmOpenDevice: node name is /dev/dri/card0 drmOpenDevice: open result is -1, (No such device) drmOpenDevice: open result is -1, (No such device) drmOpenDevice: Open failed [drm] failed to load kernel module "fglrx" (II) fglrx(0): [drm] drmOpen failed (EE) fglrx(0): DRIScreenInit failed! (WW) fglrx(0): *********************************************** (WW) fglrx(0): * DRI initialization failed! * (WW) fglrx(0): * (maybe driver kernel module missing or bad) * (WW) fglrx(0): * 2D acceleraton available (MMIO) * (WW) fglrx(0): * no 3D acceleration available * (WW) fglrx(0): ********************************************* * (II) fglrx(0): FBADPhys: 0xe8000000 FBMappedSize: 0x08000000 (==) fglrx(0): Write-combining range (0xe8000000,0x8000000) (II) fglrx(0): FBMM initialized for area (0,0)-(1280,8191) (II) fglrx(0): FBMM auto alloc for area (0,0)-(1280,1024) (front color buffer - assumption) (==) fglrx(0): Backing store disabled (==) fglrx(0): Silken mouse enabled (II) fglrx(0): Using hardware cursor (scanline 1024) (II) fglrx(0): Largest offscreen area available: 1280 x 7163 (WW) fglrx(0): Option "CalcAlgorithm" is not used (II) fglrx(0): Using XFree86 Acceleration Architecture (XAA) Screen to screen bit blits Solid filled rectangles Solid Horizontal and Vertical Lines Offscreen Pixmaps Setting up tile and stipple cache: 32 128x128 slots 32 256x256 slots 16 512x512 slots (II) fglrx(0): Acceleration enabled (II) fglrx(0): Direct rendering disabled Before installing the fglrx, I printed the readme and checked off each step. The only thing that caught my attention is in step 2 when I did make -f Makefile.module I saw the message linking of fglrx kernel module duplication skipped - generator was not called from regular lib tree should I be concerned about that? Is there some other important step which the writer of the README at ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/i386/supplementary/X/XFree86/ATI/suse90/fglrx/3.7.6/ omitted? While I haven't opened the computer to confirm, I suspect that the video card is a Radeon 9200 chipset but not an ATI manufactured board. could this be a problem? I would really appreciate any help on this. Damon Register
On Wednesday 28 April 2004 12:31 pm, Damon Register wrote:
I have been searching the list archive to find a solution for my problem. Enabling 3D in sax2 doesn't work. I see in several messages that this has been discussed a lot so I would only like to ask if my understanding of all this is correct.
Am I correct in the following? 1. 3D will not work with SuSE 9.0 out of the box? 2. I need ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/i386/supplementary/X/XFree86/ATI/suse90/f glrx/3.7.6/ to get this working? 3. issues are as stated in README from item 2?
Damon Register ===========
Damon, The 8500 has been out for quite sometime now. I have seen support for this card since SuSE 8.1! 3D support came in 9.0 without adding anything, as it was fully supported in the kernel (fglrx module) and Sax2. I have customers running this card without problems, but they are full ATI cards, not clones with ATI chips. If the card is a "real" ATI card, it should be ok in 9.0 naturally, both 2D & 3D. If the card is from an oddball 3rd party maker of graphics cards, that could very well be where your problems are coming from. There should be several mails in the archives about the things you are asking about, as it has certainly been covered many times here. The more you muck around with trying the ATI driver & back to Sax2, etc., the more likely you are to get a messed up graphics system. If you try to use the ATI drivers, then stick with all ATI setup tools! If you try to use Sax2 after installing the ATI drivers, YOU WILL mess everything up the ATI drivers tried to do. Lee -- --- KMail v1.6.2 --- SuSE Linux Pro v9.0 --- Registered Linux User #225206 On any other day, that might seem strange...
BandiPat wrote:
The 8500 has been out for quite sometime now. I have seen support for I made a mistake in my original post. I have 2 computers, one older with the 8500 and a new HP with a generic brand Radeon 9200 card. I was actually working on the new HP with the 9200 but had the other computer on my mind when I wrote the post. I tried 3D on the 8500 and found that it actually did work with SuSE 9.0 out of the box, although I did find that (at least for me) it only worked by manually adding load "dri" to the XF86Config file.
this card since SuSE 8.1! 3D support came in 9.0 without adding So I see. After re-installing SuSE 9.0 on the HP with Radeon 9200 to clean up the mess I made by installing ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/i386/supplementary/X/XFree86/ATI/suse90/fglrx/3.7.6/ I found that it also worked with 3D by manually editing the XF86Config file. I even got tuxracer working.
anything, as it was fully supported in the kernel (fglrx module) and This confuses me a little. If I use the SuSE 9.0 installation without changing anything, I don't see fglrx, but instead I see glx in the configuration. Is this the same thing or something else?
If the card is a "real" ATI card, it should be ok in 9.0 naturally, both It isn't
more you muck around with trying the ATI driver & back to Sax2, etc., the more likely you are to get a messed up graphics system. If you try Did that so I reinstalled SuSE. It was a learning process
So the first answer I got saying I needed the above mentioned fglrx package is not correct (I don't need it)? Am I correct in thinking that this fglrx package is an alternate to the one packaged with SuSE 9.0 and I must use the alternate setup too when using this fglrx? Can anyone explain why the README with the above fglrx says to use sax2 to configure if this doesn't work? Togan, if you are reading this, can you include something on this subject in your FAQ? I have looked through the past mail and it has been discussed a lot but I couldn't find a clear answer. When or why does a person need the alternate driver? I know you rely on contributions and I am not asking you to figure all this out and write it yourself. If I can gather sufficient information, could you put it in your FAQ? Damon Register
On Monday 03 May 2004 11:19 am, Damon Register wrote: [...]
anything, as it was fully supported in the kernel (fglrx module) and
This confuses me a little. If I use the SuSE 9.0 installation without changing anything, I don't see fglrx, but instead I see glx in the configuration. Is this the same thing or something else? *********
No, check your modules in your kernel and you will find the fglrx.o module for the ATI card. Mantel started including it sometime back, I believe as the result of ATI's cooperation with the Linux community. It is the /lib/modules/<kernel version>/kernel/drivers/char/drm/fglrx.o ---------------- [...]
So the first answer I got saying I needed the above mentioned fglrx package is not correct (I don't need it)? Am I correct in thinking that this fglrx package is an alternate to the one packaged with SuSE 9.0 and I must use the alternate setup too when using this fglrx? Can anyone explain why the README with the above fglrx says to use sax2 to configure if this doesn't work? ************
Well, before the module appeared in the kernel, the ATI drivers was the best solution for the newer 9xxx series. If memory serves me, the ATI driver still gives you some "special" ATI perks with your card, but I did not see any difference in speed between the two for 3D. After some trial & error in setting up the ATI drivers, I was able to determine you used their provided software to configure everything or you became frustrated by not doing so! ;o) -------------
Togan, if you are reading this, can you include something on this subject in your FAQ? I have looked through the past mail and it has been discussed a lot but I couldn't find a clear answer. When or why does a person need the alternate driver? I know you rely on contributions and I am not asking you to figure all this out and write it yourself. If I can gather sufficient information, could you put it in your FAQ?
Damon Register ============
Running the 9.1 LiveCD last evening and experimenting somewhat, I found also that SuSE had gotten the 3D to work with the 2.6 kernel as well. The intitial 2.6 builds would not do 3D with ATI naturally. I do believe using the ATI drivers would allow things to work though. So, 9.1 should be as good with the ATI cards as 9.0 is, naturally. Lee -- --- KMail v1.6.2 --- SuSE Linux Pro v9.0 --- Registered Linux User #225206 On any other day, that might seem strange...
participants (4)
-
BandiPat -
Damon Register -
Damon Register -
Mike