Hi all, I'm having problems configuring my graphics. The card came with the machine and I thought I'd bought a 9000 but when I opened the box the card says Radeon 9200 (should be better, right :) The card runs fine in text mode and will run X at 640x480 and at 800x600 but I haven't persuaded it to run at 1024x768 or 1280x1024 yet and would welcome any help. I'm running SuSE 8.2 with a Mantel kernel (k_smp-2.4.21-59 - I know there's a more recent one but I'm reluctant to upgrade every other day!). I've obtained the ATI driver (fglrx-glc22-4.3.0-3.2.5) and rebuilt the kernel and driver. I'm currently running with the XF86Config-4 file generated by fglrxconfig. I've previously tried to use sax2 but it seems less than helpful - it doesn't recognize either the graphics card or my monitor (a Hitachi CML174SXW LCD) and forgets the monitor details every time I type them in. I've also played a bit with modelines generated by http://xtiming.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/xtiming.pl but I don't really understand what I'm doing and suspect I shouldn't need to do that. Whatever I do, it seems to run OK at lower resolutions but not at the higher ones. I've run X -probeonly and the output is at the bottom of this message (snipped because the list server won't take it all). I'm a bit worried by the message: (--) fglrx(0): board vendor info: third party grafics adapter - NOT original ATI especially given what people have said about problematic clones, but when I run it up in windows (at 1280x1024 incidentally!) the system information report says: PNP Device ID PCI\VEN_1002&DEV_5961&SUBSYS_280117EE&REV_01\4&1A99067F&0&0008 which I believe indicates an ATI board. Why they can't at least print their name on the board is beyond me.
ATI better clamp down on this problem or it will be the last ATI card I will ever buy.
Agreed. Their support also seems pretty flaky; they answered a query by saying that all questions about linux had to be submitted via another web page, and that page explicitly says not to expect any response! Anyway, I'll be grateful for any suggestions as to what I need to do to enable 1280x1024. Cheers, Dave ---------------------------------------------------------------------- XFree86 Version 4.3.0 Release Date: 27 February 2003 X Protocol Version 11, Revision 0, Release 6.6 Build Operating System: SuSE Linux [ELF] SuSE Build Date: 28 March 2003 Before reporting problems, check http://www.XFree86.Org/ to make sure that you have the latest version. Module Loader present Markers: (--) probed, (**) from config file, (==) default setting, (++) from command line, (!!) notice, (II) informational, (WW) warning, (EE) error, (NI) not implemented, (??) unknown. (==) Log file: "/var/log/XFree86.0.log", Time: Wed Sep 10 13:18:15 2003 (==) Using config file: "/etc/X11/XF86Config-4" (==) ServerLayout "Server Layout" (**) |-->Screen "Screen0" (0) (**) | |-->Monitor "Monitor0" (**) | |-->Device "ATI Graphics Adapter" (**) |-->Input Device "Mouse1" (**) |-->Input Device "Keyboard1" (**) Option "AutoRepeat" "500 30" (**) Option "XkbRules" "xfree86" (**) XKB: rules: "xfree86" (**) Option "XkbModel" "pc102" (**) XKB: model: "pc102" (**) Option "XkbLayout" "gb" (**) XKB: layout: "gb" (==) Keyboard: CustomKeycode disabled (**) FontPath set to "/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/local/,/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/misc/,/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/75dpi/:unscaled,/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/Type1/,/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/Speedo/,/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/75dpi/" (**) RgbPath set to "/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/rgb" (==) ModulePath set to "/usr/X11R6/lib/modules" (--) using VT number 7 (WW) Open APM failed (/dev/apm_bios) (No such device) (II) Module ABI versions: XFree86 ANSI C Emulation: 0.2 XFree86 Video Driver: 0.6 XFree86 XInput driver : 0.4 XFree86 Server Extension : 0.2 XFree86 Font Renderer : 0.4 (II) Loader running on linux (II) LoadModule: "bitmap" (II) Loading /usr/X11R6/lib/modules/fonts/libbitmap.a (II) Module bitmap: vendor="The XFree86 Project" compiled for 4.3.0, module version = 1.0.0 Module class: XFree86 Font Renderer ABI class: XFree86 Font Renderer, version 0.4 (II) Loading font Bitmap (II) LoadModule: "pcidata" (II) Loading /usr/X11R6/lib/modules/libpcidata.a (II) Module pcidata: vendor="The XFree86 Project" compiled for 4.3.0, module version = 1.0.0 ABI class: XFree86 Video Driver, version 0.6 (II) PCI: Probing config type using method 1 (II) PCI: Config type is 1 (II) PCI: stages = 0x03, oldVal1 = 0x00000000, mode1Res1 = 0x80000000 (II) PCI: PCI scan (all values are in hex) (II) PCI: 00:00:0: chip 8086,2578 card 8086,2578 rev 02 class 06,00,00 hdr 00 (II) PCI: 00:01:0: chip 8086,2579 card 0000,0000 rev 02 class 06,04,00 hdr 01 (II) PCI: 00:03:0: chip 8086,257b card 0000,0000 rev 02 class 06,04,00 hdr 01 (II) PCI: 00:1d:0: chip 8086,24d2 card 8086,425a rev 02 class 0c,03,00 hdr 80 (II) PCI: 00:1d:1: chip 8086,24d4 card 8086,425a rev 02 class 0c,03,00 hdr 00 (II) PCI: 00:1d:2: chip 8086,24d7 card 8086,425a rev 02 class 0c,03,00 hdr 00 (II) PCI: 00:1d:3: chip 8086,24de card 8086,425a rev 02 class 0c,03,00 hdr 00 (II) PCI: 00:1d:7: chip 8086,24dd card 8086,425a rev 02 class 0c,03,20 hdr 00 (II) PCI: 00:1e:0: chip 8086,244e card 0000,0000 rev c2 class 06,04,00 hdr 01 (II) PCI: 00:1f:0: chip 8086,24d0 card 0000,0000 rev 02 class 06,01,00 hdr 80 (II) PCI: 00:1f:2: chip 8086,24d1 card 8086,425a rev 02 class 01,01,8a hdr 00 (II) PCI: 00:1f:3: chip 8086,24d3 card 8086,425a rev 02 class 0c,05,00 hdr 00 (II) PCI: 01:00:0: chip 1002,5961 card 17ee,2801 rev 01 class 03,00,00 hdr 00 (II) PCI: 02:01:0: chip 8086,1019 card 8086,3025 rev 00 class 02,00,00 hdr 00 (II) PCI: End of PCI scan <snip> (II) FireGL8700/8800: Driver for chipset: ATI RV250 Id (R9000), ATI RV250 Ie (R9000), ATI RV250 If (R9000), ATI RV250 Ig (R9000), ATI RV250 Ld (M9), ATI RV250 Le (M9), ATI RV250 Lf (M9), ATI RV250 Lg (M9), ATI RV280 5960 (R9200 PRO), ATI RV280 Ya (R9200), ATI RV250 5C61 (M9+), ATI RV250 5C63 (M9+), ATI R200 QH (R8500), ATI R200 QL (R8500), ATI R200 QM (R9100), ATI R200 QT (R8500), ATI R200 QU (R9100), ATI R200 BB (R8500), ATI RV350 AP (R9600), ATI RV350 AR (R9600 PRO), ATI RV350 NP (M10), ATI R300 AD (R9500), ATI R300 AE (R9500), ATI R300 AF (R9500), ATI R300 AG (Fire GL Z1/X1), ATI R300 ND (R9700 PRO), ATI R300 NE (R9700/R9500 PRO), ATI R300 NF (R9600 TX), ATI R300 NG (Fire GL X1), ATI R350 AK (Fire GL unknown), ATI RV350 AT (Fire GL T2), ATI RV350 AU (Fire GL T2), ATI RV350 AV (Fire GL T2), ATI RV350 AW (Fire GL T2), ATI R350 NH (R9800), ATI R350 NK (Fire GL unknown) (II) Primary Device is: PCI 01:00:0 (--) Chipset ATI RV280 Ya (R9200) found <snip> (II) Setting vga for screen 0. (II) fglrx(0): === [R200PreInit] === begin, [s] (II) Loading sub module "vgahw" (II) LoadModule: "vgahw" (II) Loading /usr/X11R6/lib/modules/libvgahw.a (II) Module vgahw: vendor="The XFree86 Project" compiled for 4.3.0, module version = 0.1.0 ABI class: XFree86 Video Driver, version 0.6 (II) fglrx(0): PCI bus 1 card 0 func 0 (**) fglrx(0): Depth 24, (--) framebuffer bpp 32 (II) fglrx(0): Pixel depth = 24 bits stored in 4 bytes (32 bpp pixmaps) (==) fglrx(0): Default visual is TrueColor <snip> (II) Loading sub module "int10" (II) LoadModule: "int10" (II) Loading /usr/X11R6/lib/modules/linux/libint10.a (II) Module int10: vendor="The XFree86 Project" compiled for 4.3.0, module version = 1.0.0 ABI class: XFree86 Video Driver, version 0.6 (II) fglrx(0): initializing int10 (II) fglrx(0): Primary V_BIOS segment is: 0xc000 (--) fglrx(0): Chipset: "ATI RV280 Ya (R9200)" (Chipset = 0x5961) (--) fglrx(0): (PciSubVendor = 0x17ee, PciSubDevice = 0x2801) (--) fglrx(0): board vendor info: third party grafics adapter - NOT original ATI(--) fglrx(0): Linear framebuffer (phys) at 0xc0000000 (--) fglrx(0): MMIO registers at 0xff8f0000 (--) fglrx(0): ROM-BIOS at 0xff8c0000 (--) fglrx(0): ChipRevID = 0x00 (--) fglrx(0): VideoRAM: 131072 kByte (64-bit DDR SDRAM) (WW) fglrx(0): board is an unknown third party board, chipset is supported (II) Loading sub module "ddc" (II) LoadModule: "ddc" (II) Loading /usr/X11R6/lib/modules/libddc.a (II) Module ddc: vendor="The XFree86 Project" compiled for 4.3.0, module version = 1.0.0 ABI class: XFree86 Video Driver, version 0.6 (II) Loading sub module "i2c" (II) LoadModule: "i2c" (II) Loading /usr/X11R6/lib/modules/libi2c.a (II) Module i2c: vendor="The XFree86 Project" compiled for 4.3.0, module version = 1.2.0 ABI class: XFree86 Video Driver, version 0.6 (II) fglrx(0): I2C bus "DDC" initialized. (II) fglrx(0): Connector Layout from BIOS -------- (II) fglrx(0): Connector1: DDCType-3, DACType-0, TMDSType--1, ConnectorType-2 (II) fglrx(0): Connector0: DDCType-2, DACType-1, TMDSType-0, ConnectorType-3 (**) fglrx(0): MonitorLayout Option: Monitor1--Type AUTO, Monitor2--Type AUTO (II) fglrx(0): I2C device "DDC:ddc2" registered at address 0xA0. (II) fglrx(0): I2C device "DDC:ddc2" removed. (II) fglrx(0): I2C device "DDC:ddc2" registered at address 0xA0. (II) fglrx(0): I2C device "DDC:ddc2" removed. (II) fglrx(0): DDC detected on DDCType 2 with Monitor Type 3 (II) fglrx(0): I2C device "DDC:ddc2" registered at address 0xA0. (II) fglrx(0): I2C device "DDC:ddc2" removed. (II) fglrx(0): I2C device "DDC:ddc2" registered at address 0xA0. (II) fglrx(0): I2C device "DDC:ddc2" removed. (II) fglrx(0): I2C device "DDC:ddc2" registered at address 0xA0. (II) fglrx(0): I2C device "DDC:ddc2" removed. (II) fglrx(0): DDC detected on DDCType 3 with Monitor Type 0 (II) fglrx(0): Primary head: Monitor -- TMDS Connector -- DVI-I DAC Type -- TVDAC/ExtDAC TMDS Type -- Internal DDC Type -- DVI_DDC (II) fglrx(0): Secondary head: Monitor -- NONE Connector -- VGA DAC Type -- Primary TMDS Type -- NONE DDC Type -- VGA_DDC (II) fglrx(0): EDID data from the display on Primary head ---------------- (II) fglrx(0): Manufacturer: HTC Model: 178c Serial#: 6721 (II) fglrx(0): Year: 2003 Week: 10 (II) fglrx(0): EDID Version: 1.3 (II) fglrx(0): Digital Display Input (II) fglrx(0): Max H-Image Size [cm]: horiz.: 34 vert.: 27 (II) fglrx(0): Gamma: 2.20 (II) fglrx(0): DPMS capabilities: StandBy Suspend Off; RGB/Color Display (II) fglrx(0): First detailed timing is preferred mode (II) fglrx(0): redX: 0.640 redY: 0.340 greenX: 0.280 greenY: 0.620 (II) fglrx(0): blueX: 0.140 blueY: 0.070 whiteX: 0.310 whiteY: 0.330 (II) fglrx(0): Supported VESA Video Modes: (II) fglrx(0): 720x400@70Hz (II) fglrx(0): 640x480@60Hz (II) fglrx(0): 640x480@67Hz (II) fglrx(0): 640x480@72Hz (II) fglrx(0): 640x480@75Hz (II) fglrx(0): 800x600@56Hz (II) fglrx(0): 800x600@60Hz (II) fglrx(0): 800x600@72Hz (II) fglrx(0): 800x600@75Hz (II) fglrx(0): 832x624@75Hz (II) fglrx(0): 1024x768@60Hz (II) fglrx(0): 1024x768@70Hz (II) fglrx(0): 1024x768@75Hz (II) fglrx(0): 1280x1024@75Hz (II) fglrx(0): Manufacturer's mask: 0 (II) fglrx(0): Supported Future Video Modes: (II) fglrx(0): #0: hsize: 1280 vsize 1024 refresh: 60 vid: 32897 (II) fglrx(0): Supported additional Video Mode: (II) fglrx(0): clock: 108.0 MHz Image Size: 338 x 270 mm (II) fglrx(0): h_active: 1280 h_sync: 1328 h_sync_end 1440 h_blank_end 1688 h_border: 0 (II) fglrx(0): v_active: 1024 v_sync: 1025 v_sync_end 1028 v_blanking: 1066 v_border: 0 (II) fglrx(0): Ranges: V min: 56 V max: 75 Hz, H min: 24 H max: 80 kHz, PixClock max 140 MHz (II) fglrx(0): Monitor name: CML174SX (II) fglrx(0): Serial No: H3C006721 (II) fglrx(0): (II) fglrx(0): DesktopSetup 0x0000 (==) fglrx(0): PseudoColor visuals disabled (==) fglrx(0): Overlay disabled (**) fglrx(0): Overlay disabled (II) fglrx(0): PLL parameters: rf=2700 rd=12 min=20000 max=50000; xclk=20000 (==) fglrx(0): Using gamma correction (1.0, 1.0, 1.0) (**) fglrx(0): Center Mode is disabled (==) fglrx(0): TMDS coherent mode is enabled (II) fglrx(0): Panel size found from DDC: 1280x1024 (II) fglrx(0): Total 5 valid mode(s) found. (--) fglrx(0): Virtual size is 1280x1024 (pitch 1280) (**) fglrx(0): *Default mode "1280x1024": 135.0 MHz (scaled from 0.0 MHz), 80.0 kHz, 75.0 Hz (II) fglrx(0): Modeline "1280x1024" 135.00 1280 1296 1440 1688 1024 1025 1028 1066 +hsync +vsync (**) fglrx(0): *Default mode "1024x768": 78.8 MHz (scaled from 0.0 MHz), 60.1 kHz, 75.1 Hz (II) fglrx(0): Modeline "1024x768" 78.80 1024 1040 1136 1312 768 769 772 800 +hsync +vsync (**) fglrx(0): Default mode "832x624": 57.3 MHz (scaled from 0.0 MHz), 49.7 kHz, 74.6 Hz (II) fglrx(0): Modeline "832x624" 57.28 832 864 928 1152 624 625 628 667 -hsync -vsync (**) fglrx(0): *Default mode "800x600": 50.0 MHz (scaled from 0.0 MHz), 48.1 kHz, 72.2 Hz (II) fglrx(0): Modeline "800x600" 50.00 800 856 976 1040 600 637 643 666 +hsync +vsync (**) fglrx(0): *Default mode "640x480": 31.5 MHz (scaled from 0.0 MHz), 37.5 kHz, 75.0 Hz (II) fglrx(0): Modeline "640x480" 31.50 640 656 720 840 480 481 484 500 -hsync -vsync (--) fglrx(0): Display dimensions: (340, 270) mm (--) fglrx(0): DPI set to (95, 96) (II) Loading sub module "fb" (II) LoadModule: "fb" (II) Loading /usr/X11R6/lib/modules/libfb.a (II) Module fb: vendor="The XFree86 Project" compiled for 4.3.0, module version = 1.0.0 ABI class: XFree86 ANSI C Emulation, version 0.2 (II) Loading sub module "ramdac" (II) LoadModule: "ramdac" (II) Loading /usr/X11R6/lib/modules/libramdac.a (II) Module ramdac: vendor="The XFree86 Project" compiled for 4.3.0, module version = 0.1.0 ABI class: XFree86 Video Driver, version 0.6 (**) fglrx(0): NoAccel = NO (II) Loading sub module "xaa" (II) LoadModule: "xaa" (II) Loading /usr/X11R6/lib/modules/libxaa.a (II) Module xaa: vendor="The XFree86 Project" compiled for 4.3.0, module version = 1.1.0 ABI class: XFree86 Video Driver, version 0.6 (**) fglrx(0): FSAAScale=1 (**) fglrx(0): NoDRI = NO (II) Loading sub module "fglrxdrm" (II) LoadModule: "fglrxdrm" (II) Loading /usr/X11R6/lib/modules/linux/libfglrxdrm.a (II) Module fglrxdrm: vendor="Fire GL - ATI Research GmbH, Germany" compiled for 4.3.0, module version = 3.2.5 ABI class: XFree86 Server Extension, version 0.2 (II) fglrx(0): Depth moves disabled by default (**) fglrx(0): Capabilities: 0x00000000 (**) fglrx(0): cpuFlags: 0x8000001d (**) fglrx(0): cpuSpeedMHz: 0x00000ae9 (==) fglrx(0): OpenGL ClientDriverName: "fglrx_dri.so" (**) fglrx(0): using built in AGPGART module: yes (**) fglrx(0): UseFastTLS=0 (**) fglrx(0): BlockSignalsOnLock=1 (==) fglrx(0): EnablePrivateBackZ = NO (II) fglrx(0): using CAIL version [ATI LIB=CAIL.LIB,IA32,2.0024]
On Wednesday 10 September 2003 10:45 am, Dave Howorth wrote:
Hi all,
I'm having problems configuring my graphics. The card came with the machine and I thought I'd bought a 9000 but when I opened the box the card says Radeon 9200 (should be better, right :)
The card runs fine in text mode and will run X at 640x480 and at 800x600 but I haven't persuaded it to run at 1024x768 or 1280x1024 yet and would welcome any help.
I'm running SuSE 8.2 with a Mantel kernel (k_smp-2.4.21-59 - I know there's a more recent one but I'm reluctant to upgrade every other day!). I've obtained the ATI driver (fglrx-glc22-4.3.0-3.2.5) and rebuilt the kernel and driver.
I'm currently running with the XF86Config-4 file generated by fglrxconfig. I've previously tried to use sax2 but it seems less than helpful - it doesn't recognize either the graphics card or my monitor (a Hitachi CML174SXW LCD) and forgets the monitor details every time I type them in.
Anyway, I'll be grateful for any suggestions as to what I need to do to enable 1280x1024.
Cheers, Dave
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Dave, My 9200 has done nicely both in 2d & 3d, once I got the ATI driver installed and the 3d module built for my kernel. Once you have or start using the ATI driver, do not go back to sax2 to try any type of configuration as it will change your symlinks on the libGL libraries and you will be using Mesasoft again. I was able to get the higher resolutions even using the VESA framebuffer settings in sax2, before installing the ATI driver, so XFree86 4.3 at least handled the card, but would not optimize for it. I am presently running 1280x1024 at 24bit, seems that the 9200 likes the 24bit better as I usually just run at 16bit. I am also running the Mantel kernel, but using the 2.4.21-64 build as it fixed some things not working in the -59 build, specifically 3D and direct rendering module loading, you might want to update also. Remove the ATI driver with rpm -e, install the newer kernel or go back to the SuSE kernel (2.4.20-100), but be sure to install the kernel-source as well for that kernel. You will then need to install your ATI driver again and it will give you some instructions, which I believe are also in a readme file from ATI's site. cd /usr/src/linux make mrproper make cloneconfig make dep Then execute the instructions from ATI to finish building your 3d driver modules. Run fglrxconfig to configure the card and restart your X server. Hopefully things will take off for you as easily as they did for me. Be aware though that if you AGP is not up to standards, you may still have problems as it pushes it for the speed it needs. Good Luck Pat -- --- KMail v1.5.3-3 --- SuSE Linux Pro v8.2 --- Registered Linux User #225206 On any other day, that might seem strange...
Pat, I'm not having much success. I decided to take your advice to upgrade the kernel, so I went to Mantel's site and got the kernel. It is now -67 rather than -64, BTW. I compiled and installed it, apparently without problem (I'm no expert) though I've just noticed from the dmesg that only one CPU is detected (I did make oldconfig, which I thought should pick up the configuration from the previous build? Maybe I need to do cloneconfig again?) It gives me a system that appears to behave exactly as before (i.e it runs at 640x480 and 800x600 but not 1024x768 or 1280x1024) even though it is not using the fglrx driver (it doesn't show up in lsmod anyway). I then went to compile the driver but it failed like this: cpepc210-1:/ # cd /lib/modules/fglrx/build_mod/ cpepc210-1:/lib/modules/fglrx/build_mod # ./make.sh ATI module generator V 2.0 ========================== probing for VMA API version... cleaning... patching 'highmem.h'... skipping patch for 'drmP.h', not needed doing script based build for kernel 2.4.x and similar compiling 'agpgart_be.c'... compiling 'agp3.c'... compiling 'i7505-agp.c'... compiling 'nvidia-agp.c'... compiling 'firegl_public.c'... firegl_public.c:208: error: initializer element is not constant compiling failed - object file was not generated Any thoughts on this? Or on other possible reasons I can't get it to run at higher resolutions? One other point I thought to mention is that I'm using the DVI-D connection to the monitor. Cheers, Dave --------------------- BandiPat wrote:
On Wednesday 10 September 2003 10:45 am, Dave Howorth wrote:
Hi all,
I'm having problems configuring my graphics. The card came with the machine and I thought I'd bought a 9000 but when I opened the box the card says Radeon 9200 (should be better, right :)
The card runs fine in text mode and will run X at 640x480 and at 800x600 but I haven't persuaded it to run at 1024x768 or 1280x1024 yet and would welcome any help.
I'm running SuSE 8.2 with a Mantel kernel (k_smp-2.4.21-59 - I know there's a more recent one but I'm reluctant to upgrade every other day!). I've obtained the ATI driver (fglrx-glc22-4.3.0-3.2.5) and rebuilt the kernel and driver.
I'm currently running with the XF86Config-4 file generated by fglrxconfig. I've previously tried to use sax2 but it seems less than helpful - it doesn't recognize either the graphics card or my monitor (a Hitachi CML174SXW LCD) and forgets the monitor details every time I type them in.
Anyway, I'll be grateful for any suggestions as to what I need to do to enable 1280x1024.
Cheers, Dave
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Dave, My 9200 has done nicely both in 2d & 3d, once I got the ATI driver installed and the 3d module built for my kernel. Once you have or start using the ATI driver, do not go back to sax2 to try any type of configuration as it will change your symlinks on the libGL libraries and you will be using Mesasoft again.
I was able to get the higher resolutions even using the VESA framebuffer settings in sax2, before installing the ATI driver, so XFree86 4.3 at least handled the card, but would not optimize for it. I am presently running 1280x1024 at 24bit, seems that the 9200 likes the 24bit better as I usually just run at 16bit. I am also running the Mantel kernel, but using the 2.4.21-64 build as it fixed some things not working in the -59 build, specifically 3D and direct rendering module loading, you might want to update also. Remove the ATI driver with rpm -e, install the newer kernel or go back to the SuSE kernel (2.4.20-100), but be sure to install the kernel-source as well for that kernel.
You will then need to install your ATI driver again and it will give you some instructions, which I believe are also in a readme file from ATI's site.
cd /usr/src/linux make mrproper make cloneconfig make dep
Then execute the instructions from ATI to finish building your 3d driver modules. Run fglrxconfig to configure the card and restart your X server. Hopefully things will take off for you as easily as they did for me. Be aware though that if you AGP is not up to standards, you may still have problems as it pushes it for the speed it needs.
Good Luck Pat
On Thursday 11 September 2003 06:15 am, Dave Howorth wrote:
Pat,
I'm not having much success.
I decided to take your advice to upgrade the kernel, so I went to Mantel's site and got the kernel. It is now -67 rather than -64, BTW. I compiled and installed it, apparently without problem (I'm no expert) though I've just noticed from the dmesg that only one CPU is detected (I did make oldconfig, which I thought should pick up the configuration from the previous build? Maybe I need to do cloneconfig again?)
It gives me a system that appears to behave exactly as before (i.e it runs at 640x480 and 800x600 but not 1024x768 or 1280x1024) even though it is not using the fglrx driver (it doesn't show up in lsmod anyway).
I then went to compile the driver but it failed like this:
cpepc210-1:/ # cd /lib/modules/fglrx/build_mod/ cpepc210-1:/lib/modules/fglrx/build_mod # ./make.sh ATI module generator V 2.0 ========================== probing for VMA API version... cleaning... patching 'highmem.h'... skipping patch for 'drmP.h', not needed doing script based build for kernel 2.4.x and similar compiling 'agpgart_be.c'... compiling 'agp3.c'... compiling 'i7505-agp.c'... compiling 'nvidia-agp.c'... compiling 'firegl_public.c'... firegl_public.c:208: error: initializer element is not constant compiling failed - object file was not generated
Any thoughts on this? Or on other possible reasons I can't get it to run at higher resolutions? One other point I thought to mention is that I'm using the DVI-D connection to the monitor.
Cheers, Dave
---------------------
Dave, Not sure at this point, someone with a bit more knowledge of Linux may have to step up to the plate and help too. One thing is though, you must have a different model card than I do, as I do not have the DVI-D connector on my card, just the standard 15 & tv & video out. That may be the difference in what we are experiencing with the VESA modes. I haven't tried the -67 Mantel build, so don't know what new things he introduced with it. I was helping test the others to get rid of the direct rendering bug. You can get the same -64 version still though at this alternate mirror. ftp://ftp.rz.uni-ulm.de/pub/mirrors/suse/people/mantel/next/RPM They keep them around for a few days longer than Mantel does and you might try using his version instead of building it, just out of curiousity. Pat -- --- KMail v1.5.3-3 --- SuSE Linux Pro v8.2 --- Registered Linux User #225206 On any other day, that might seem strange...
I wrote:
One other point I thought to mention is that I'm using the DVI-D connection to the monitor.
and BandiPat replied:
Not sure at this point, someone with a bit more knowledge of Linux may have to step up to the plate and help too. One thing is though, you must have a different model card than I do, as I do not have the DVI-D connector on my card, just the standard 15 & tv & video out. That may be the difference in what we are experiencing with the VESA modes.
At last some good news. I took the whizzy digital DVI-D cable off and put a grotty old analogue cable on and now it runs happily at 1280x1024! Incidentally, the video on Knoppix just came up and ran - I'll go back and check the resolution if I get time. Anybody know the tricks of the trade for using DVI-D that might apply here?
I haven't tried the -67 Mantel build, so don't know what new things he introduced with it.
One specific thing I noticed in the readme was that HZ has been changed, something to do with a desktop variant of the kernel IIRC.
You can get the same -64 version still though at this alternate mirror. ftp://ftp.rz.uni-ulm.de/pub/mirrors/suse/people/mantel/next/RPM
Thanks for that. I got and installed that, though it didn't of itself make any difference. It does seem to understand 875P-ness though. My first problem was getting the e1000 Ethernet driver to run - fixed on this list :) My second problem is the video - well at least I've got a work around and hopefully somebody can come up with the real deal :) Now all I need to do is to set the BIOS to show the SATA disks in native mode ... Crosses fingers ... Cheers, Dave
A little more information: Dave Howorth wrote:
I've just noticed from the dmesg that only one CPU is detected
The good news is that dmesg is no longer full of 'unknown device' messages, so I guess the kernel now understands more about the 875P chipset.
compiling 'firegl_public.c'... firegl_public.c:208: error: initializer element is not constant compiling failed - object file was not generated
Line 208 in the source file says: const unsigned long __ke_HZ = HZ; but HZ isn't a constant in this version of the kernel! So I guess the latest SuSE kernel is now incompatible with the ATI graphics driver. Anybody have any idea on how to fix it? Alternatively, does anybody know how long I need to wait before this hardware is supported in a stable release that I can just install? Cheers, Dave
Someone is not reading things right - ATI Design and manufacture the Video Chipset, a Basic Driver that matches and a preferred circuit diagram They sell it to others to make, assemble and sell the boards (yes they do also make boards but it's not their main business) If others manufacture boards with their chipset with component cutdown, it's not their fault You just need to make sure you buy a well known manufacturers board, then you can check their site for information and driver updates, they may not be the cheapest but, ...... Personally I always check the motherboard's manufacturer's website for a recomended list of video card suppliers to match the motherboard and work from there. also a 9200 is not better than a 9000 as it's a different chipset, it just uses the same 'video core'. scsijon At 03:45 PM 10/09/2003, Dave Howorth wrote:
Hi all,
I'm having problems configuring my graphics. The card came with the machine and I thought I'd bought a 9000 but when I opened the box the card says Radeon 9200 (should be better, right :)
The card runs fine in text mode and will run X at 640x480 and at 800x600 but I haven't persuaded it to run at 1024x768 or 1280x1024 yet and would welcome any help.
I'm running SuSE 8.2 with a Mantel kernel (k_smp-2.4.21-59 - I know there's a more recent one but I'm reluctant to upgrade every other day!). I've obtained the ATI driver (fglrx-glc22-4.3.0-3.2.5) and rebuilt the kernel and driver.
I'm currently running with the XF86Config-4 file generated by fglrxconfig. I've previously tried to use sax2 but it seems less than helpful - it doesn't recognize either the graphics card or my monitor (a Hitachi CML174SXW LCD) and forgets the monitor details every time I type them in.
I've also played a bit with modelines generated by http://xtiming.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/xtiming.pl but I don't really understand what I'm doing and suspect I shouldn't need to do that.
Whatever I do, it seems to run OK at lower resolutions but not at the higher ones.
I've run X -probeonly and the output is at the bottom of this message (snipped because the list server won't take it all). I'm a bit worried by the message:
(--) fglrx(0): board vendor info: third party grafics adapter - NOT original ATI
especially given what people have said about problematic clones, but when I run it up in windows (at 1280x1024 incidentally!) the system information report says:
PNP Device ID PCI\VEN_1002&DEV_5961&SUBSYS_280117EE&REV_01\4&1A99067F&0&0008
which I believe indicates an ATI board. Why they can't at least print their name on the board is beyond me.
ATI better clamp down on this problem or it will be the last ATI card I will ever buy.
Agreed. Their support also seems pretty flaky; they answered a query by saying that all questions about linux had to be submitted via another web page, and that page explicitly says not to expect any response!
Anyway, I'll be grateful for any suggestions as to what I need to do to enable 1280x1024.
Cheers, Dave
----------------------------------------------------------------------
scsijon wrote:
Someone is not reading things right -
Not sure what the intention behind that comment or your mail is, but it's sure worded to annoy me. I'll try to respond without flaming but please accept my apologies if something inadvertently offends.
ATI Design and manufacture the Video Chipset, a Basic Driver that matches and a preferred circuit diagram
They sell it to others to make, assemble and sell the boards (yes they do also make boards but it's not their main business)
If others manufacture boards with their chipset with component cutdown, it's not their fault
OK. This I know. There's one caveat, which is that if ATI lend their name to these third-party boards then they must share responsibility with the manufacturers for the quality of the resulting product. ATI are clearly aware of this issue with their 'powered by ATI' branding and certification process.
You just need to make sure you buy a well known manufacturers board, then you can check their site for information and driver updates, they may not be the cheapest but, ......
This I also know. That's why I specified an ATI-manufactured board ('built by ATI' in their parlance). My main gripe with ATI is that despite understanding the importance of the manufacturer and the importance of branding, they do not insist that it is made clear. As I stated (see snippet below), I am now having doubts about what card has been supplied to me, despite what I ordered. The card does not seem to have a manufacturer's name on it, but when you go to the ATI page about identifying its products: http://www.ati.com/support/identify/index.html you'll see that it is not straightforward to identify a board (as opposed to its packaging). Why can't they simply screenprint 'built by ATI' on the board, for example, and require third-parties to screenprint 'powered by ATI'. Specifically, I believe the instructions for identifying part numbers are not clear and that their device identification chart is out of date (it does not include the 9200). A second gripe is that they treat people asking for Linux support as some kind of second class lepers, stonewalling questions by directing them to be sent to a web pages that promises you will *not* get a response. (i.e support people at ATI do not answer questions, nor do they forward them to their Linux people, they take the trouble to write responses saying that they're not going to answer.) So I still believe that there are several ways ATI could improve their customer service and product presentation. My last two purchases have been ATI, but I'm not sure my next one will be.
Personally I always check the motherboard's manufacturer's website for a recomended list of video card suppliers to match the motherboard and work from there.
I ask my supplier to supply an integrated package certified to work with Linux. It usually works but has failed badly on this occasion.
also a 9200 is not better than a 9000 as it's a different chipset, it just uses the same 'video core'.
OK. Thanks for the information - you saw the smiley in my mail (below)? One well-known problem of numeric model numbers is that people associate larger numbers with later, better products. It causes grief for carmakers all the time. Cheers, Dave =======================================
I'm having problems configuring my graphics. The card came with the machine and I thought I'd bought a 9000 but when I opened the box the card says Radeon 9200 (should be better, right :) ======================================= I've run X -probeonly and the output is at the bottom of this message (snipped because the list server won't take it all). I'm a bit worried by the message:
(--) fglrx(0): board vendor info: third party grafics adapter - NOT original ATI
especially given what people have said about problematic clones, but when I run it up in windows (at 1280x1024 incidentally!) the system information report says:
PNP Device ID PCI\VEN_1002&DEV_5961&SUBSYS_280117EE&REV_01\4&1A99067F&0&0008
which I believe indicates an ATI board. Why they can't at least print their name on the board is beyond me.
ATI better clamp down on this problem or it will be the last ATI card I will ever buy.
Agreed. Their support also seems pretty flaky; they answered a query by saying that all questions about linux had to be submitted via another web page, and that page explicitly says not to expect any response!
Dave Howorth wrote:
I ask my supplier to supply an integrated package certified to work with Linux. It usually works but has failed badly on this occasion.
I've gone back to my supplier and they're being helpful. They say that the problem they have is they *cannot* buy ATI-manufactured boards here in the UK. Consequently, they're suggesting to replace the Connect 9200 with Sapphire Radeon 9000 part code: 11006-00-10 Does anybody know whether this card works, especially with a DVI-D connector? Or for that matter anything about ATI cards in the UK? Cheers, Dave
participants (3)
-
BandiPat -
Dave Howorth -
scsijon