-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Hi
Since some days my system is very unstable. I get many crashes with kernel
panics.
First one app is killed because of a segfault, than it doesn't take a long
time and the computer is down. What is the problem, is it a memory error ?
thanks
have fun
Felix
P.S. Here is one of this crashes:
hal@hal:~$ ksymoops -m /boot/System.map error.txt
ksymoops 2.4.6 on i686 2.4.19. Options used
-V (default)
-k /proc/ksyms (default)
-l /proc/modules (default)
-o /lib/modules/2.4.19/ (default)
-m /boot/System.map (specified)
<1>Unable to handle kernel paging request at virtual address f1ec9808
c01468de
Oops: 0002
CPU: 0
EIP: 0010:[get_new_inode+94/368] Tainted: P
EFLAGS: 00010206
eax: f1ec9808 ebx: 00000000 ecx: c1376130 edx: c3761dc8
esi: f1ec9800 edi: d3f92b90 ebp: d3e82a00 esp: c7ddfe98
ds: 0018 es: 0018 ss: 0018
Process exim (pid: 25555, stackpage=c7ddf000)
Stack: 00000000 d3f92b90 00027e26 d3e82a00 c0146b76 d3e82a00 00027e26 d3f92b90
00000000 00000000 ccf07840 d3e67ac0 ccf07840 c137a940 c01556c3 d3e82a00
00027e26 00000000 00000000 fffffff4 d3e67ac0 c013cd93 d3e67ac0 ccf07840
Call Trace: [iget4+182/208] [ext2_lookup+67/112] [real_lookup+83/192]
[link_path_walk+1495/2144] [path_walk+26
Code: 89 56 08 c7 40 04 a4 c4 2a c0 a3 a4 c4 2a c0 8b 07 89 70 04
Using defaults from ksymoops -t elf32-i386 -a i386
>>ecx; c1376130 <_end+103e580/194d94b0>
>>edx; c3761dc8 <_end+342a218/194d94b0>
>>edi; d3f92b90 <_end+13c5afe0/194d94b0>
>>ebp; d3e82a00 <_end+13b4ae50/194d94b0>
>>esp; c7ddfe98 <_end+7aa82e8/194d94b0>
Code; 00000000 Before first symbol
00000000 <_EIP>:
Code; 00000000 Before first symbol
0: 89 56 08 mov %edx,0x8(%esi)
Code; 00000003 Before first symbol
3: c7 40 04 a4 c4 2a c0 movl $0xc02ac4a4,0x4(%eax)
Code; 0000000a Before first symbol
a: a3 a4 c4 2a c0 mov %eax,0xc02ac4a4
Code; 0000000f Before first symbol
f: 8b 07 mov (%edi),%eax
Code; 00000011 Before first symbol
11: 89 70 04 mov %esi,0x4(%eax)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQE9lXMnS0DOrvdnsewRAlhiAJ9bsKSjsQFfYB8I3GinK2+V3PSMGQCZAQR5
bgETND+WX7jzxoWMnMOe1/8=
=Kgow
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> EIP: 0010:[get_new_inode+94/368] Tainted: P
> EFLAGS: 00010206
> eax: f1ec9808 ebx: 00000000 ecx: c1376130 edx: c3761dc8
>
You appear to have some non typical modules loaded. If they are binary
ones from people like Nvidia please see if the box is stable without
them ever being loaded.
If its only just begun happening and you didnt change these modules or
the kernel then it may well be worth checking CPU temperature in the
BIOS, the fans and/or running memtest86 to see if it is hardware.
If you've changed kernel obviously see if the old one works reliably
first
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Am Samstag, 28. September 2002 11:32 schrieb Alan Cox:
> > EIP: 0010:[get_new_inode+94/368] Tainted: P
> > EFLAGS: 00010206
> > eax: f1ec9808 ebx: 00000000 ecx: c1376130 edx: c3761dc8
>
> You appear to have some non typical modules loaded. If they are binary
> ones from people like Nvidia please see if the box is stable without
> them ever being loaded.
Yes I am using the nvidia module. But I don't think that is the problem,
because I never had such problems with it.
The only thing I can imagine is that:
I installed the new module and I looked very unstable. So I installed the old
one again.
> If its only just begun happening and you didnt change these modules or
> the kernel then it may well be worth checking CPU temperature in the
> BIOS, the fans and/or running memtest86 to see if it is hardware.
>
> If you've changed kernel obviously see if the old one works reliably
> first
Thanks, I will do that.
have fun
Felix
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQE9lXejS0DOrvdnsewRAka2AJ9EGwZ/h3WczFx59gU0hJSlkHeuGQCfdgzY
FN0ppyzAY4Hm00Mz0Zg7DTs=
=jlDs
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Hi,
On Sat, 28 Sep 2002, Felix Seeger wrote:
> Yes I am using the nvidia module. But I don't think that is the problem,
> because I never had such problems with it.
> The only thing I can imagine is that:
> I installed the new module and I looked very unstable. So I installed the old
> one again.
You got that wrong. It's not meant to be a torture on the user, but it's
rather that NVdriver only works on kernels it was explicitly written for.
Otherwise most things just won't match. That's where NVdriver uses to hit.
Please check again without ever loading the NVdriver. (i.e. from a clean
reboot.)
Thunder
--
assert(typeof((fool)->next) == typeof(fool)); /* wrong */
On Sat, 2002-09-28 at 10:55, Felix Seeger wrote:
> But I have a Desktop system. I play games. I can't remove that driver.
> I am running 2.4.19 since it is out and never had such problems with the
> NVDriver.
What we want to know is: does it crash with no NVdriver involved from
boot. Thats the one thing that says 'Maybe the Linux kernel has a
problem' and means people can hunt it down
I'd still start with the hw tests first just because of the description
you give. However if they seem ok and it wont crash without the NVdriver
loaded - talk to Nvidia not us 8)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Am Samstag, 28. September 2002 11:50 schrieb Thunder from the hill:
> Hi,
>
> On Sat, 28 Sep 2002, Felix Seeger wrote:
> > Yes I am using the nvidia module. But I don't think that is the problem,
> > because I never had such problems with it.
> > The only thing I can imagine is that:
> > I installed the new module and I looked very unstable. So I installed the
> > old one again.
>
> You got that wrong. It's not meant to be a torture on the user, but it's
> rather that NVdriver only works on kernels it was explicitly written for.
> Otherwise most things just won't match. That's where NVdriver uses to hit.
>
> Please check again without ever loading the NVdriver. (i.e. from a clean
> reboot.)
>
> Thunder
I know your problems with the NVdriver and I understand it. Also I don't like
it. I has many bugs and is not closed source, I understand that no developer
wants to work with that.
But I have a Desktop system. I play games. I can't remove that driver.
I am running 2.4.19 since it is out and never had such problems with the
NVDriver.
I will test my mem this night, and than I slow down the Nvidia chip (sometime
that helps).
If nothing helps, I will try to remove the module.
But thanks for your answers
have fun
Felix
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQE9lXyUS0DOrvdnsewRAmWpAJ45U7NNwh5+THtIvkBvvg6XB/4UyACfc0i+
fYT6lxfSX8sNTSUYvmTCMU0=
=F382
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
From: Felix Seeger <[email protected]>
Date: Sat, 28 Sep 2002 11:55:32 +0200
But I have a Desktop system. I play games.
Not an excuse, get a Radeon like the rest of us :-)
Hi,
On Sat, 28 Sep 2002, David S. Miller wrote:
> But I have a Desktop system. I play games.
>
> Not an excuse, get a Radeon like the rest of us :-)
I'm on NVidia Vanta, and all fine. ;-)
Thunder
From: Thunder from the hill <[email protected]>
Date: Sat, 28 Sep 2002 04:10:39 -0600 (MDT)
I'm on NVidia Vanta, and all fine. ;-)
We'll remember that for future bug reports from you :-)
On Sat, 28 Sep 2002 11:34:27 +0200
Felix Seeger <[email protected]> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Am Samstag, 28. September 2002 11:32 schrieb Alan Cox:
> > > EIP: 0010:[get_new_inode+94/368] Tainted: P
> > > EFLAGS: 00010206
> > > eax: f1ec9808 ebx: 00000000 ecx: c1376130 edx: c3761dc8
> >
> > You appear to have some non typical modules loaded. If they are binary
> > ones from people like Nvidia please see if the box is stable without
> > them ever being loaded.
> Yes I am using the nvidia module. But I don't think that is the problem,
> because I never had such problems with it.
> The only thing I can imagine is that:
> I installed the new module and I looked very unstable. So I installed the old
> one again.
>
Yes and that's the point. You're using the 1.0.3123 Version of nvidia's module, right? I tried this also, but after 1 hour I removed it again, because they are very instable. I don't know what nvidia thinks. Probably nothing. Their drivers are unworthy. It won't take a long time, until I will buy a graphic-card from another manufacturer. Perhaps Matrox Parhelia:-)
> > If its only just begun happening and you didnt change these modules or
> > the kernel then it may well be worth checking CPU temperature in the
> > BIOS, the fans and/or running memtest86 to see if it is hardware.
> >
> > If you've changed kernel obviously see if the old one works reliably
> > first
>
> Thanks, I will do that.
>
> have fun
> Felix
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iD8DBQE9lXejS0DOrvdnsewRAka2AJ9EGwZ/h3WczFx59gU0hJSlkHeuGQCfdgzY
> FN0ppyzAY4Hm00Mz0Zg7DTs=
> =jlDs
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to [email protected]
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Am Samstag, 28. September 2002 12:23 schrieb Marc Giger:
> On Sat, 28 Sep 2002 11:34:27 +0200
>
> Felix Seeger <[email protected]> wrote:
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > Hash: SHA1
> >
> > Am Samstag, 28. September 2002 11:32 schrieb Alan Cox:
> > > > EIP: 0010:[get_new_inode+94/368] Tainted: P
> > > > EFLAGS: 00010206
> > > > eax: f1ec9808 ebx: 00000000 ecx: c1376130 edx: c3761dc8
> > >
> > > You appear to have some non typical modules loaded. If they are binary
> > > ones from people like Nvidia please see if the box is stable without
> > > them ever being loaded.
> >
> > Yes I am using the nvidia module. But I don't think that is the problem,
> > because I never had such problems with it.
> > The only thing I can imagine is that:
> > I installed the new module and I looked very unstable. So I installed the
> > old one again.
>
> Yes and that's the point. You're using the 1.0.3123 Version of nvidia's
> module, right?
> I tried this also, but after 1 hour I removed it again,
> because they are very instable. I don't know what nvidia thinks. Probably
> nothing. Their drivers are unworthy. It won't take a long time, until I
> will buy a graphic-card from another manufacturer. Perhaps Matrox
> Parhelia:-)
No, I installed that module, very unstable and installed the old one again
like you ;)
> > > If its only just begun happening and you didnt change these modules or
> > > the kernel then it may well be worth checking CPU temperature in the
> > > BIOS, the fans and/or running memtest86 to see if it is hardware.
> > >
> > > If you've changed kernel obviously see if the old one works reliably
> > > first
have fun
Felix
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQE9lYTuS0DOrvdnsewRAuPCAJwIKCT4gQUvRxkjKrPdngM8BaiePQCeM3Ms
vNWRu3N6aGdN+Mkm5z0CXLs=
=fD9/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Am Samstag, 28. September 2002 11:59 schrieb David S. Miller:
> From: Felix Seeger <[email protected]>
> Date: Sat, 28 Sep 2002 11:55:32 +0200
>
> But I have a Desktop system. I play games.
>
> Not an excuse, get a Radeon like the rest of us :-)
>
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to [email protected]
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Don't think I am not looking for other cards.
Of course nobody will hear from me: buy an nvidia card.
But if it is a mem problem I will use badmem.
No money for new mem or a new graphics card at the moment :(
Even if that is a little bit OT. What card is good (performance for games and
a acceptable licenze for kernel developers)? I saw that Matrox has nice
drivers which are not open source but at least you can see the source.
I need a card with good OpenGL performance and things like that ( I want doom3
if it is out). I don't know much about Radeon.
thanks
have fun
Felix
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQE9lYVxS0DOrvdnsewRAnpgAJ9OzCYS+g7KLU7aClGJljMZpUkt1QCfQlYI
BHI8FkdnJHGQHHCybBDPgKU=
=8S4R
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Am Samstag, 28. September 2002 12:08 schrieb Alan Cox:
> On Sat, 2002-09-28 at 10:55, Felix Seeger wrote:
> > But I have a Desktop system. I play games. I can't remove that driver.
> > I am running 2.4.19 since it is out and never had such problems with the
> > NVDriver.
>
> What we want to know is: does it crash with no NVdriver involved from
> boot. Thats the one thing that says 'Maybe the Linux kernel has a
> problem' and means people can hunt it down
>
> I'd still start with the hw tests first just because of the description
> you give. However if they seem ok and it wont crash without the NVdriver
> loaded - talk to Nvidia not us 8)
Of course you will get a bugreport if the problem was not mem, nv or something
like that :)
have fun
Felix
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQE9lYYWS0DOrvdnsewRAnzaAJ49xInPsltcn7hJZTHWvsdWUgraewCfUQZz
/jRe8Ch4QbGvUTuKc77j/I0=
=+rXg
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
From: Felix Seeger <[email protected]>
Date: Sat, 28 Sep 2002 12:33:21 +0200
What card is good (performance for games and
a acceptable licenze for kernel developers)?
ATI Radeon is pretty fast and all except the very latest chips have
opensource drivers.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
David S. Miller wrote:
| From: Felix Seeger <[email protected]>
| Date: Sat, 28 Sep 2002 12:33:21 +0200
|
| What card is good (performance for games and
| a acceptable licenze for kernel developers)?
|
| ATI Radeon is pretty fast and all except the very latest chips have
| opensource drivers.
Could you recommend a specific chipset that works well,
2D and 3D-wise ?
I use a G450, it has excellent driver support but the 3D is
a bit... lacking.
- --
F. CAMI
- ----------------------------------------------------------
~ "To disable the Internet to save EMI and Disney is the
moral equivalent of burning down the library of Alexandria
to ensure the livelihood of monastic scribes."
~ - John Ippolito (Guggenheim)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQE9lYwyuBGY13rZQM8RApBCAJ0Q/lteUi86iZzGk7bcEgSfmQMqDwCgqBLj
o9wG7N1l9EXYrl7ogMB5mtY=
=jZ/u
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
From: FD Cami <[email protected]>
Date: Sat, 28 Sep 2002 13:02:10 +0200
Could you recommend a specific chipset that works well,
2D and 3D-wise ?
I use a G450, it has excellent driver support but the 3D is
a bit... lacking.
All of the Radeon's blow the G450 out of the water.
I clear 140+ fps easily on quake3 with my Radeon R100 QD
(Radeon 64 DDR)
On 09/28/02 18:35, David S. Miller wrote:
> From: Felix Seeger <[email protected]>
> Date: Sat, 28 Sep 2002 12:33:21 +0200
>
> What card is good (performance for games and
> a acceptable licenze for kernel developers)?
>
> ATI Radeon is pretty fast and all except the very latest chips have
> opensource drivers.
Radeon 7500 is currently the fastest board with an opensource
driver that supports 3D. 8500 XFree support is currently 2D only,
although apparently work on the opensource GL driver is underway.
You can get 3D support for the 8500 if you get a commercial
binary only X server ( http://www.xig.com/ ) - although I
guess this is almost as bad as having a binary kernel module
due to the type of hardware access the X server needs to do.
I have a 7500 mobility in my IBM laptop. Stable and fast -
get about 90fps playing tuxracer.
The desktop version of the 7500 is evidentally is about the
same performance as a Geforce2Ti - which is not bad.
ATI has also just released the 9700 which beats the pants
of the fastest Nvidia, if only their was XFree support.
~mc
From: Thunder from the hill <[email protected]>
Date: Sat, 28 Sep 2002 05:35:41 -0600 (MDT)
Hi,
On Sat, 28 Sep 2002, David S. Miller wrote:
> ATI Radeon is pretty fast and all except the very latest chips have
> opensource drivers.
Seems this binary only garbage comes creeping in.
This is old news, they opensource the drivers at a later date,
this is how it's always worked with ATI.
Hi,
On Sat, 28 Sep 2002, David S. Miller wrote:
> ATI Radeon is pretty fast and all except the very latest chips have
> opensource drivers.
Seems this binary only garbage comes creeping in. Reminds me in some other
OS which couldn't even get into development because everyone uses outdated
APIs then. We shouldn't get there.
Anyway, that all goes into my garbage collection.
Thunder
On Sat, Sep 28, 2002 at 07:13:57PM +0800, Michael Clark wrote:
> On 09/28/02 18:35, David S. Miller wrote:
> > From: Felix Seeger <[email protected]>
> > Date: Sat, 28 Sep 2002 12:33:21 +0200
> >
> > What card is good (performance for games and
> > a acceptable licenze for kernel developers)?
> >
> >ATI Radeon is pretty fast and all except the very latest chips have
> >opensource drivers.
>
> Radeon 7500 is currently the fastest board with an opensource
> driver that supports 3D. 8500 XFree support is currently 2D only,
> although apparently work on the opensource GL driver is underway.
Unfortunately, in my experience the open source Radeon 7500 drivers are
so unstable as to be basically unusable. Plus, they seem to still be
basically incompatible with a lot of 3d software.
I tried to get them to work for about 3 months this year, but finally
gave up when it became clear that I'd need to buy another computer, put
the Radeon in it, and start debugging the Radeon driver myself to get it
working (lest you get the wrong impression, I mean here that I'd have to
do it myself because other people seemed to be seeing them crash
somewhat less often than I did, thus I had the best repro. Plus, to get
particular software to work, I'd have to trace it myself since other
people wouldn't have it) Which would mean, I'd still need to buy a
graphics card to use in the meantime for my real machine. Not being
able to justify the expense of a new, identical computer, I decided to
simply buy the graphics card and forego debugging the Radeon for the
time being. I know, I'm a wuss.
The only reasonable option seemed to be to replace it with an NVidia
card, which has turned out to be about five orders of magnitude more
stable than the Radeon was even with the horrible closed-source NVidia
drivers. (The MTBF for the Radeon was about 12 seconds, for the NVidia,
it seems to be about 3 days)
On the other hand, my old Matrox G400 card had stable open source
drivers which didn't appear to crash at all, so if stability is most
important, I'd say go with one of those. Unfortunately, the card itself
is rather slow. (Though strangely enough, in realistic tests, it was
pretty much equal or better than the Radeon... For the short time the
Radeon could go without hard-locking the computer, that is. This was
partly because the rendering quality was so much better, the Radeon had
to be run in 32 bit mode to compare with 16-bit rendering on the Matrox
in terms of output.)
If you need to avoid NVidia, I'd say go for a Matrox G400, or maybe some
sort of older Radeon which might be more stable.
-J
On Sat, 2002-09-28 at 07:34, David S. Miller wrote:
> This is old news, they opensource the drivers at a later date,
> this is how it's always worked with ATI.
Note that ATI now has a binary driver available that supports the 8500,
written by their German development group. Available via their standard
"find a driver" page, using Linux as OS. See, for example,
http://mirror.ati.com/support/products/pc/radeon8500/linux/radeon8500linuxdrivers.html?cboOS=LinuxXFree86&cboProducts=RADEON+8500LE&cmdNext=GO%21
The scripts that build a kernel module and link it against their library
work pretty well and are, to their credit, not impossibly tied to one
distro over another. :-) I run Slackware.
ktk@madmax:~$ glxgears
10474 frames in 5.0 seconds = 2094.800 FPS
10797 frames in 5.0 seconds = 2159.400 FPS
Kris
On Sun, 2002-09-29 at 00:42, Kristofer T. Karas wrote:
> On Sat, 2002-09-28 at 07:34, David S. Miller wrote:
> > This is old news, they opensource the drivers at a later date,
> > this is how it's always worked with ATI.
>
> Note that ATI now has a binary driver available that supports the 8500,
> written by their German development group. Available via their standard
> "find a driver" page, using Linux as OS. See, for example,
> http://mirror.ati.com/support/products/pc/radeon8500/linux/radeon8500 \
> linuxdrivers.html?cboOS=LinuxXFree86&cboProducts=RADEON+8500 \
> LE&cmdNext=GO%21
>
> The scripts that build a kernel module and link it against their library
> work pretty well and are, to their credit, not impossibly tied to one
> distro over another. :-) I run Slackware.
>
> ktk@madmax:~$ glxgears
> 10474 frames in 5.0 seconds = 2094.800 FPS
> 10797 frames in 5.0 seconds = 2159.400 FPS
This is slower than the current DRI can do ;-)
dual Athlon MP 1900+ (but all XFree and Mesa stuff is single threaded
currently):
Mesa/demos> ./gears
r200CreateScreen
6465 frames in 5.000 seconds = 1293.000 FPS
11955 frames in 5.000 seconds = 2391.000 FPS
11954 frames in 5.000 seconds = 2390.800 FPS
11955 frames in 5.000 seconds = 2391.000 FPS
11954 frames in 5.000 seconds = 2390.800 FPS
I wonder why nobody point to the place were "the real development" is?
dri.sourceforge.net
or the new test site (under construktion)
http://lfm.sourceforge.net/dritest/
Xv is supported with the current trunk, too.
If you need the video capabilities take a look at the GATOS page.
http://gatos.sourceforge.net/
Cheers,
Dieter
--
Dieter N?tzel
Graduate Student, Computer Science
University of Hamburg
Department of Computer Science
@home: Dieter.Nuetzel at hamburg.de (replace at with @)
On 09/29/02 08:00, Elladan wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 28, 2002 at 07:13:57PM +0800, Michael Clark wrote:
>
>>On 09/28/02 18:35, David S. Miller wrote:
>>
>>> From: Felix Seeger <[email protected]>
>>> Date: Sat, 28 Sep 2002 12:33:21 +0200
>>>
>>> What card is good (performance for games and
>>> a acceptable licenze for kernel developers)?
>>>
>>>ATI Radeon is pretty fast and all except the very latest chips have
>>>opensource drivers.
>>
>>Radeon 7500 is currently the fastest board with an opensource
>>driver that supports 3D. 8500 XFree support is currently 2D only,
>>although apparently work on the opensource GL driver is underway.
>
>
> Unfortunately, in my experience the open source Radeon 7500 drivers are
> so unstable as to be basically unusable. Plus, they seem to still be
> basically incompatible with a lot of 3d software.
Don't know what version of X you've been running, but i haven't
had a problem for over 8 months (since XFree86 4.2). Before then,
the 4.1.99 CVS was needed for radeon support which was of course
a developer branch, although i never experienced the sort of problems
you describe.
Definately rock solid and stable on my 7500 mobility.
~mc
On Sat, Sep 28, 2002 at 07:13:57PM +0800, Michael Clark wrote:
> On 09/28/02 18:35, David S. Miller wrote:
> > From: Felix Seeger <[email protected]>
> > Date: Sat, 28 Sep 2002 12:33:21 +0200
> >
> > What card is good (performance for games and
> > a acceptable licenze for kernel developers)?
> >
> >ATI Radeon is pretty fast and all except the very latest chips have
> >opensource drivers.
>
> Radeon 7500 is currently the fastest board with an opensource
> driver that supports 3D. 8500 XFree support is currently 2D only,
> although apparently work on the opensource GL driver is underway.
>
> You can get 3D support for the 8500 if you get a commercial
> binary only X server ( http://www.xig.com/ ) - although I
> guess this is almost as bad as having a binary kernel module
> due to the type of hardware access the X server needs to do.
>
There's also 3D support for the r200 chip (that drives the 8500) in
the DRI cvs tree (see http://dri.sf.net): I haven't tried it, since
I don't have an 8500, but it's there, and under active development,
and seem to work fairly well.
Simon
--
PGP public key Id 0x144A991C, or http://himi.org/stuff/himi.asc
(crappy) Homepage: http://himi.org
doe #237 (see http://www.lemuria.org/DeCSS)
My DeCSS mirror: ftp://himi.org/pub/mirrors/css/
Felix Seeger <[email protected]> writes:
[NVidia]
> it. I has many bugs and is not closed source, I understand that no developer
> wants to work with that.
No, while it really has many bugs, it _is_ closed source. No developer
is able to work with it. The *.[ch] files you see there are just stubs,
the real code is in binary-only library.
> But I have a Desktop system. I play games. I can't remove that driver.
> I am running 2.4.19 since it is out and never had such problems with the
> NVDriver.
I had many problems with their drivers. They have just forced me to
buy Radeon instead (and it works fine).
--
Krzysztof Halasa
Network Administrator
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Am Samstag, 28. September 2002 14:46 schrieb Krzysztof Halasa:
> Felix Seeger <[email protected]> writes:
>
> [NVidia]
>
> > it. I has many bugs and is not closed source, I understand that no
> > developer wants to work with that.
>
> No, while it really has many bugs, it _is_ closed source. No developer
> is able to work with it. The *.[ch] files you see there are just stubs,
> the real code is in binary-only library.
Oh, hehe ;)
Sorry, of course it is closed source.
> > But I have a Desktop system. I play games. I can't remove that driver.
> > I am running 2.4.19 since it is out and never had such problems with the
> > NVDriver.
>
> I had many problems with their drivers. They have just forced me to
> buy Radeon instead (and it works fine).
I will see how good Radeon is, thanks for all your answers btw.
have fun
Felix
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQE9l0EMS0DOrvdnsewRArpRAJ43iBBnlktbLWq60GkFIZt1FZHsYACeJQcQ
YEsrVr8JX3Cw/KudZHAI79w=
=3hRN
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
On Sun, Sep 29, 2002 at 01:50:36PM +0800, Michael Clark wrote:
> On 09/29/02 08:00, Elladan wrote:
> >On Sat, Sep 28, 2002 at 07:13:57PM +0800, Michael Clark wrote:
> >>
> >>Radeon 7500 is currently the fastest board with an opensource
> >>driver that supports 3D. 8500 XFree support is currently 2D only,
> >>although apparently work on the opensource GL driver is underway.
> >
> >Unfortunately, in my experience the open source Radeon 7500 drivers are
> >so unstable as to be basically unusable. Plus, they seem to still be
> >basically incompatible with a lot of 3d software.
>
> Don't know what version of X you've been running, but i haven't
> had a problem for over 8 months (since XFree86 4.2). Before then,
> the 4.1.99 CVS was needed for radeon support which was of course
> a developer branch, although i never experienced the sort of problems
> you describe.
>
> Definately rock solid and stable on my 7500 mobility.
For 2d, the card was fine except for some drawing bugs. I was using
XFree 4.2, as well as trying a large number of DRI CVS snapshots and the
like when the 4.2 release version proved too unstable to use.
The stability problems aside, the other issue with the 7500 drivers is
that they just didn't appear compatible with even rather simple GL
software. There appeared to be severe graphics problems in basically
all of the OpenGL example programs I could get to run. More complicated
games didn't tend to run at all - either the game would give an error
and fail to start, or the computer would crash. The computer-
crashing-instantly aspect made it rather difficult for me to see how to
have a pleasant debugging experience without a lot more hardware, which
is why I gave up.
And of course, for comparison, Matrox and NVidia cards in the same
machine work fine, and the Radeon card worked fine when placed in a
windows box for testing. So the evidence points to a driver stability
problem.
I don't mean to get completely off-topic with "Waa! It didn't work!"
stories, but this seemed to be a recommendations thread. My
recommendation: Radeon 7500 no, other Radeons I don't know. Your
mileage may vary. If you have time for a new driver debugging project,
Radeon 7500 big yes. And hopefully XFree 4.3 will solve all the world's
problems. :-)
-J
On Sun, 2002-09-29 at 01:41, Dieter N?tzel wrote:
> > ktk@madmax:~$ glxgears
> > 10797 frames in 5.0 seconds = 2159.400 FPS
>
> This is slower than the current DRI can do ;-)
> 11955 frames in 5.000 seconds = 2391.000 FPS
Ah, well then! :-)
The difference in numbers might be due to clock timing. I have an
8500LEE, which was an original batch of 8500's that couldn't meet their
advertised clock times, so had the clock dropped back to 170MHz; they
were only sold that way in Japan, IIRC. Driving it is a UP
AthlonXP-1700. Running a 250MHz Radeon-8500 might surpass your numbers
(250/170 * 2159) = 3174!
Kris
Am Montag, 30. September 2002 08:47 schrieb Kristofer T. Karas:
> On Sun, 2002-09-29 at 01:41, Dieter N?tzel wrote:
> > > ktk@madmax:~$ glxgears
> > > 10797 frames in 5.0 seconds = 2159.400 FPS
> >
> > This is slower than the current DRI can do ;-)
> > 11955 frames in 5.000 seconds = 2391.000 FPS
>
> Ah, well then! :-)
>
> The difference in numbers might be due to clock timing. I have an
> 8500LEE, which was an original batch of 8500's that couldn't meet their
> advertised clock times, so had the clock dropped back to 170MHz; they
> were only sold that way in Japan, IIRC. Driving it is a UP
> AthlonXP-1700. Running a 250MHz Radeon-8500 might surpass your numbers
> (250/170 * 2159) = 3174!
It depends...;-)
Mine is in no way OC or the like.
-Dieter