Mailinglist Archive: radeonhd (4 mails)

[Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@xxxxxxxxx>]

2010/10/21 David C. Rankin <drankinatty@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> On 10/06/2010 11:48 PM, Rafał Miłecki wrote:
> > > Thomas,
> > > >        I'm interested in any response you get here. I have chased x1250 
> > > > issues in
> > > > radeonhd for the past year+ and haven't had the time to pursue it to an 
> > > > answer.
> > > > I'll watch the list and the next time I get a bit of time, I'll pull the 
> > > > latest
> > > > git and see if I can add anything else. Best I can tell it may be a 
> > > > chipset ID
> > > > issue for the RS690(whatever) chips. There are chipset/clock differences 
> > > > between
> > > > the x1200 and x1250, but it looks like some chips don't correctly identify
> > > > themselves. (I'm not sure what difference that makes to radeonhd, but if 
> > > > that
> > > > impacts the clock settings, etc.., that may be one of the issues you are 
> > > > dealing
> > > > with)
> > You really should switch to KMS. It's actively developed driver.
>
> Rafal,
>
>        I do use KMS configured on occasion with KMS (early) and also with KMS 
> (late).
> I'm running Arch Linux. (see http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/ATI) To me, I
> don't see any difference in the basic frame buffer, it acts the same both 
> ways.
>
>        What benefits are you thinking of? And is this kernel mode setting 
> scheme the
> same KMS you are talking about?

Really, there are many articles, notes on KMS. It's just wasting time
to explain it over and over again what are the advantages of KMS,
please Google.

-- 
Rafał
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: radeonhd+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: radeonhd+help@xxxxxxxxxxxx