Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S264583AbUAVP74 (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Jan 2004 10:59:56 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S265815AbUAVP74 (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Jan 2004 10:59:56 -0500 Received: from ppp-82-135-4-160.mnet-online.de ([82.135.4.160]:16000 "EHLO frodo.midearth.frodoid.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S264583AbUAVP7y (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Jan 2004 10:59:54 -0500 X-Original-To: sent@frodoid.org Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2004 16:57:32 +0100 From: Julien Oster To: Dave Jones Subject: Re: parhelia doesn't work anymore with 2.6.1 Message-ID: <20040122155732.GB1138@frodo.midearth.frodoid.org> References: <20040122152137.GA1138@frodo.midearth.frodoid.org> <20040122155016.GA18361@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20040122155016.GA18361@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1658 Lines: 42 On Thu, Jan 22, 2004 at 03:50:16PM +0000, Dave Jones wrote: Hello Dave, > > I know the Matrox Parhelia kernel driver ist partly a binary only > > driver, but I am not explicitly asking for support on that driver. > actually, you are. agpgart works fine with free drivers. Yeah, but actually, I'm pretty desperate :) > > My question is: what has changed in AGP code or similar between 2.4.24 > > and 2.6.1 that can make my Parhelia unusable? > 'lots'. seriously, they're worlds apart. they're not the same driver any more. > in fact in 2.6, agpgart is multiple drivers. That last bit I know. And with agpgart and nvidia-agp loaded, it's actually using AGP... but the screen is a real mess. > Trying to use a 2.4 module on 2.6 is going to cause you pain. lots of pain. And you can not by chance point me to some locations where I can figure out myself, so that I could try to patch the opensource portion myself? It really looks like all relevant code would be in the opensource portion. Judging from my point of view I think it must have something to do with different memory mapping or the like, as it looks like my X server (independent mode, so I should actually have two framebuffers) is writing into the same (physical?) memory area for both screens. Just give me some hints where I should start browsing the code, I can figure out thinks myself then. Pretty, pretty please :-) Regards, Julien - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/