I have a Dell P4 desktop machine with a built-in Intel graphics card. lspci reports:
00:02.0 VGA compatible controller Intel Corp 82845G/GL[Brookdale-G]/GE Chipset Integrated Graphics Device (rev 01)
The graphical installer freezes and X freezes after a short time (usually seconds or tens of seconds) after starting (even with a fully updated system). I've seen reports of issues with the Intel graphics driver on F10, but does anyone have a way of making this work or does anyone know what the status is of the driver?
I'd consider putting another card in, but the only slots in the machine are PCI and it hardly seems worth it, as I got the machine for free and it will mostly be running relatively non-graphics-intensive Windows XP stuff.
TIA.
On Mon, 16 Mar 2009, Matthew Saltzman wrote:
I have a Dell P4 desktop machine with a built-in Intel graphics card. lspci reports:
00:02.0 VGA compatible controller Intel Corp 82845G/GL[Brookdale-G]/GE Chipset Integrated Graphics Device (rev 01)
The graphical installer freezes and X freezes after a short time (usually seconds or tens of seconds) after starting (even with a fully updated system). I've seen reports of issues with the Intel graphics driver on F10, but does anyone have a way of making this work or does anyone know what the status is of the driver?
I'd consider putting another card in, but the only slots in the machine are PCI and it hardly seems worth it, as I got the machine for free and it will mostly be running relatively non-graphics-intensive Windows XP stuff.
I recommend that you do a text based install (add text to the boot line), and once you have it installed, boot to a text console (add 3 to the boot line), then add Option "NoAccel" "true" to the Device section of /etc/X11/xorg.conf
Michael Young
2009/3/16 M A Young m.a.young@durham.ac.uk
I recommend that you do a text based install (add text to the boot line), and once you have it >installed, boot to a text console (add 3 to the boot line), then add Option "NoAccel" "true" to the >Device section of /etc/X11/xorg.conf
On a fresh install he probably won't have an xorg.conf since this is F10. And the default install also doesn't include system-config-display. What he needs to do is generate an xorg.conf using either
$ Xorg -configure
or, install system-config-display using yum and use
$ system-config-display --tui
Hope that helps.
-- Suvayu
Open source is the future. It sets us free.
Matthew Saltzman-2 wrote:
I have a Dell P4 desktop machine with a built-in Intel graphics card. lspci reports:
00:02.0 VGA compatible controller Intel Corp 82845G/GL[Brookdale-G]/GE Chipset Integrated Graphics Device (rev 01)
The graphical installer freezes and X freezes after a short time (usually seconds or tens of seconds) after starting (even with a fully
Yeah this is one of the issues I had - with the same chipset - I called the vesa driver in the kernel boot line (adding xdriver=vesa) to get going and then changed the grub entry to do this for the next boot. I also added "nomodeset" as well!
HTH
M A Young wrote:
I recommend that you do a text based install (add text to the boot line), and once you have it installed, boot to a text console (add 3 to the boot line), then add Option "NoAccel" "true" to the Device section of /etc/X11/xorg.conf
I'm curious whether it's necessary to disable acceleration entirely, or simply revert to the older XAA method. On my Thinkpad X40, the Intel video driver in F10 had significant problems, where the driver on F9 was fine. I could either use XAA or revert to the older driver to get proper rendering.
I've attached a minimal xorg.conf. I believe you can save it to /etc/X11 to test each of the options individually. Try disabling accel, and then try using XAA (both options are in the file). Let us know what kind of results you get, and then track down one of the bugzilla reports on this subject (I know a few are open) and add your information.
Section "ServerLayout" Identifier "Default" Screen "Screen0" EndSection
Section "Screen" Identifier "Screen0" Device "Videocard0" EndSection
Section "Device" Identifier "Videocard0" Driver "intel" Option "NoAccel" "true" #Option "AccelMethod" "XAA" EndSection
Hi really hope the intel-devs get it right soon. Starting with Fedora9 2D performance decreased from release to release, and intel-2.6 was totally broken.
Now I am testing 2.6.902 and it frequently hangs and leaks tons of memory. Although performance has recovered in some cases, some applications (GTK1, Java) are barely useable.
Yes, there's a lot new code (and a lot forked, too) and a lot of improvements, but what was shipped with 2.6 as stable was pre-beta.
- Clemens
Gordon Messmer wrote:
M A Young wrote:
I recommend that you do a text based install (add text to the boot line), and once you have it installed, boot to a text console (add 3 to the boot line), then add Option "NoAccel" "true" to the Device section of /etc/X11/xorg.conf
I'm curious whether it's necessary to disable acceleration entirely, or simply revert to the older XAA method. On my Thinkpad X40, the Intel video driver in F10 had significant problems, where the driver on F9 was fine. I could either use XAA or revert to the older driver to get proper rendering.
I've attached a minimal xorg.conf. I believe you can save it to /etc/X11 to test each of the options individually. Try disabling accel, and then try using XAA (both options are in the file). Let us know what kind of results you get, and then track down one of the bugzilla reports on this subject (I know a few are open) and add your information.
here is the pertinant section of the xorg.conf for my aspire one which has intel gfx, this is on F10 and it works perfectly
Section "Device" Identifier "Card0" Driver "intel" VendorName "Intel Corporation" BoardName "Mobile 945GME Express Integrated Graphics Controller" VideoRam 229376 Option "MonitorLayout" "LVDS,VGA" Option "Clone" "true" Option "AccelMethod" "EXA" Option "MigrationHeuristic" "greedy" Option "CacheLines" "1980" BusID "PCI:0:2:0" EndSection
phil
Matthew Saltzman-2 wrote:
I have a Dell P4 desktop machine with a built-in Intel graphics card. lspci reports:
00:02.0 VGA compatible controller Intel Corp 82845G/GL[Brookdale-G]/GE Chipset Integrated Graphics Device (rev 01)
The graphical installer freezes and X freezes after a short time (usually seconds or tens of seconds) after starting (even with a fully updated system). I've seen reports of issues with the Intel graphics driver on F10, but does anyone have a way of making this work or does anyone know what the status is of the driver?
Yeah this is one of the issues I had - with the same chipset - I called the vesa driver in the kernel boot line (adding xdriver=vesa) to get going and then changed the grub entry to do this for the next boot. I also added "nomodeset" as well!
The Intel Integrated Graphics is currently the subject of much needed development for F11 since there is a big push to get kms working with these. You will see a current project to test the state of this in Fedora Test List.
HTH
On Mon, 2009-03-16 at 19:14 +0000, psmith wrote:
Gordon Messmer wrote:
M A Young wrote:
I recommend that you do a text based install (add text to the boot line), and once you have it installed, boot to a text console (add 3 to the boot line), then add Option "NoAccel" "true" to the Device section of /etc/X11/xorg.conf
I'm curious whether it's necessary to disable acceleration entirely, or simply revert to the older XAA method. On my Thinkpad X40, the Intel video driver in F10 had significant problems, where the driver on F9 was fine. I could either use XAA or revert to the older driver to get proper rendering.
I've attached a minimal xorg.conf. I believe you can save it to /etc/X11 to test each of the options individually. Try disabling accel, and then try using XAA (both options are in the file). Let us know what kind of results you get, and then track down one of the bugzilla reports on this subject (I know a few are open) and add your information.
here is the pertinant section of the xorg.conf for my aspire one which has intel gfx, this is on F10 and it works perfectly
Section "Device" Identifier "Card0" Driver "intel" VendorName "Intel Corporation" BoardName "Mobile 945GME Express Integrated Graphics Controller" VideoRam 229376 Option "MonitorLayout" "LVDS,VGA" Option "Clone" "true" Option "AccelMethod" "EXA" Option "MigrationHeuristic" "greedy" Option "CacheLines" "1980" BusID "PCI:0:2:0" EndSection
---- you haven't by any chance figured out how to get LVDS to use a larger virtual screen - say 1024 x 768 have you? I've been unable to do that on my Aspire One.
Craig
Craig White wrote:
On Mon, 2009-03-16 at 19:14 +0000, psmith wrote:
Gordon Messmer wrote:
M A Young wrote:
I recommend that you do a text based install (add text to the boot line), and once you have it installed, boot to a text console (add 3 to the boot line), then add Option "NoAccel" "true" to the Device section of /etc/X11/xorg.conf
I'm curious whether it's necessary to disable acceleration entirely, or simply revert to the older XAA method. On my Thinkpad X40, the Intel video driver in F10 had significant problems, where the driver on F9 was fine. I could either use XAA or revert to the older driver to get proper rendering.
I've attached a minimal xorg.conf. I believe you can save it to /etc/X11 to test each of the options individually. Try disabling accel, and then try using XAA (both options are in the file). Let us know what kind of results you get, and then track down one of the bugzilla reports on this subject (I know a few are open) and add your information.
here is the pertinant section of the xorg.conf for my aspire one which has intel gfx, this is on F10 and it works perfectly
Section "Device" Identifier "Card0" Driver "intel" VendorName "Intel Corporation" BoardName "Mobile 945GME Express Integrated Graphics Controller" VideoRam 229376 Option "MonitorLayout" "LVDS,VGA" Option "Clone" "true" Option "AccelMethod" "EXA" Option "MigrationHeuristic" "greedy" Option "CacheLines" "1980" BusID "PCI:0:2:0" EndSection
you haven't by any chance figured out how to get LVDS to use a larger virtual screen - say 1024 x 768 have you? I've been unable to do that on my Aspire One.
Craig
no sorry craig, i think i remember reading somewhere that the only way to get the "Virtual" setting to work is to pass the "NoAccel" "true" option but i've not tried it
phil
On Mon, 2009-03-16 at 22:25 +0000, psmith wrote:
Craig White wrote:
On Mon, 2009-03-16 at 19:14 +0000, psmith wrote:
Gordon Messmer wrote:
M A Young wrote:
I recommend that you do a text based install (add text to the boot line), and once you have it installed, boot to a text console (add 3 to the boot line), then add Option "NoAccel" "true" to the Device section of /etc/X11/xorg.conf
I'm curious whether it's necessary to disable acceleration entirely, or simply revert to the older XAA method. On my Thinkpad X40, the Intel video driver in F10 had significant problems, where the driver on F9 was fine. I could either use XAA or revert to the older driver to get proper rendering.
I've attached a minimal xorg.conf. I believe you can save it to /etc/X11 to test each of the options individually. Try disabling accel, and then try using XAA (both options are in the file). Let us know what kind of results you get, and then track down one of the bugzilla reports on this subject (I know a few are open) and add your information.
here is the pertinant section of the xorg.conf for my aspire one which has intel gfx, this is on F10 and it works perfectly
Section "Device" Identifier "Card0" Driver "intel" VendorName "Intel Corporation" BoardName "Mobile 945GME Express Integrated Graphics Controller" VideoRam 229376 Option "MonitorLayout" "LVDS,VGA" Option "Clone" "true" Option "AccelMethod" "EXA" Option "MigrationHeuristic" "greedy" Option "CacheLines" "1980" BusID "PCI:0:2:0" EndSection
you haven't by any chance figured out how to get LVDS to use a larger virtual screen - say 1024 x 768 have you? I've been unable to do that on my Aspire One.
Craig
no sorry craig, i think i remember reading somewhere that the only way to get the "Virtual" setting to work is to pass the "NoAccel" "true" option but i've not tried it
---- would you have "NoAccel" "true" instead of "AccelMethod" "EXA" ? is that the idea?
Craig
Craig White wrote:
On Mon, 2009-03-16 at 22:25 +0000, psmith wrote:
Craig White wrote:
On Mon, 2009-03-16 at 19:14 +0000, psmith wrote:
Gordon Messmer wrote:
M A Young wrote:
I recommend that you do a text based install (add text to the boot line), and once you have it installed, boot to a text console (add 3 to the boot line), then add Option "NoAccel" "true" to the Device section of /etc/X11/xorg.conf
I'm curious whether it's necessary to disable acceleration entirely, or simply revert to the older XAA method. On my Thinkpad X40, the Intel video driver in F10 had significant problems, where the driver on F9 was fine. I could either use XAA or revert to the older driver to get proper rendering.
I've attached a minimal xorg.conf. I believe you can save it to /etc/X11 to test each of the options individually. Try disabling accel, and then try using XAA (both options are in the file). Let us know what kind of results you get, and then track down one of the bugzilla reports on this subject (I know a few are open) and add your information.
here is the pertinant section of the xorg.conf for my aspire one which has intel gfx, this is on F10 and it works perfectly
Section "Device" Identifier "Card0" Driver "intel" VendorName "Intel Corporation" BoardName "Mobile 945GME Express Integrated Graphics Controller" VideoRam 229376 Option "MonitorLayout" "LVDS,VGA" Option "Clone" "true" Option "AccelMethod" "EXA" Option "MigrationHeuristic" "greedy" Option "CacheLines" "1980" BusID "PCI:0:2:0" EndSection
you haven't by any chance figured out how to get LVDS to use a larger virtual screen - say 1024 x 768 have you? I've been unable to do that on my Aspire One.
Craig
no sorry craig, i think i remember reading somewhere that the only way to get the "Virtual" setting to work is to pass the "NoAccel" "true" option but i've not tried it
would you have "NoAccel" "true" instead of "AccelMethod" "EXA" ? is that the idea?
Craig
yeah that's it, let me know if it works out
phil
On Mon, 2009-03-16 at 09:38 -0700, suvayu ali wrote:
2009/3/16 M A Young m.a.young@durham.ac.uk
I recommend that you do a text based install (add text to the boot line), and once you have it installed, boot to a text console (add 3 to the boot line), then add Option "NoAccel" "true" to the Device section of /etc/X11/xorg.conf
On a fresh install he probably won't have an xorg.conf since this is F10. And the default install also doesn't include system-config-display. What he needs to do is generate an xorg.conf using either
$ Xorg -configure
or, install system-config-display using yum and use
$ system-config-display --tui
Hope that helps.
I can't find the other e-mail in which someone suggested using XAA acceleration, but that seems to have worked so far. Thanks, all!
-- Suvayu
Open source is the future. It sets us free.
On Tuesday 17 March 2009 19:18, Matthew Saltzman wrote:
I can't find the other e-mail in which someone suggested using XAA acceleration, but that seems to have worked so far. Thanks, all!
It doesn't work. It improves the time between two crashes, but does not eliminate them. The only workaround that makes intel drivers stable atm is to add Option "NoAccel" "true" into xorg.conf, but that kind of defeats the purpose of having a supported, open source, 3D accelerated driver.
I have also set XAA instead of EXA, and it does slightly improve the situation, but don't rely on it.
The problem here seems not to be just the transition from the old XAA to the new EXA. The bug is somewhere deeper, and it looks like to be an interplay of various things in the intel driver itself, the kernel, the X, the usage of 3D acceleration by the apps on top of X and so on. That is why crashes appear to be random, why it is almost impossible to trigger the bug intentionally and why there is no fix for cca 5 months now.
<rant> So much for the famous Open Source support. If it were a nVidia bug, it would be just fixed in the next release of their closed-source driver. Even ATI's buggy flgrx driver gets fixed when the bug is severe enough. And here we are having the source completely open for the intel driver, and a bug that so radically affects all Intel cards is not fixed for half a year now... </rant>
Best, :-) Marko
Marko Vojinovic wrote:
On Tuesday 17 March 2009 19:18, Matthew Saltzman wrote:
I can't find the other e-mail in which someone suggested using XAA acceleration, but that seems to have worked so far. Thanks, all!
It doesn't work. It improves the time between two crashes, but does not eliminate them. The only workaround that makes intel drivers stable atm is to add Option "NoAccel" "true" into xorg.conf, but that kind of defeats the purpose of having a supported, open source, 3D accelerated driver.
I have also set XAA instead of EXA, and it does slightly improve the situation, but don't rely on it.
The problem here seems not to be just the transition from the old XAA to the new EXA. The bug is somewhere deeper, and it looks like to be an interplay of various things in the intel driver itself, the kernel, the X, the usage of 3D acceleration by the apps on top of X and so on. That is why crashes appear to be random, why it is almost impossible to trigger the bug intentionally and why there is no fix for cca 5 months now.
<rant> So much for the famous Open Source support. If it were a nVidia bug, it would be just fixed in the next release of their closed-source driver. Even ATI's buggy flgrx driver gets fixed when the bug is severe enough. And here we are having the source completely open for the intel driver, and a bug that so radically affects all Intel cards is not fixed for half a year now... </rant>
Best, :-) Marko
well i've been using my aspire one on F10 since the day of the F10 release with the exa acceleration method, i'm scoring ~780 in glxgears with
glxgears -geometry 300x300+360+150
as the command, i've yet to have a X lockup or crash either and i'm using compositing in xfwm4 too, and the plymouth solar boot works well too. obviously not everyone is having such a good time with their intel gfx hardware, but not everyone is having problems either ;)
phil
On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 07:06:48PM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Marko Vojinovic wrote:
and a bug that so radically affects all Intel cards is not fixed for half a year now...
It doesn't affect all Intel cards, only 945 and older. My GM965 works great in F10.
While I can't recall, at the moment, which Intel graphics chipset is used in the eeepc 901, F10 works fine on mine. So it's not ALL intel graphics chips that are busted.
On Tue, 2009-03-17 at 09:49 +0000, psmith wrote:
Craig White wrote:
On Mon, 2009-03-16 at 22:25 +0000, psmith wrote:
Craig White wrote:
On Mon, 2009-03-16 at 19:14 +0000, psmith wrote:
Gordon Messmer wrote:
M A Young wrote:
> I recommend that you do a text based install (add text to the boot > line), and once you have it installed, boot to a text console (add 3 > to the boot line), then add Option "NoAccel" "true" to the Device > section of /etc/X11/xorg.conf > > I'm curious whether it's necessary to disable acceleration entirely, or simply revert to the older XAA method. On my Thinkpad X40, the Intel video driver in F10 had significant problems, where the driver on F9 was fine. I could either use XAA or revert to the older driver to get proper rendering.
I've attached a minimal xorg.conf. I believe you can save it to /etc/X11 to test each of the options individually. Try disabling accel, and then try using XAA (both options are in the file). Let us know what kind of results you get, and then track down one of the bugzilla reports on this subject (I know a few are open) and add your information.
here is the pertinant section of the xorg.conf for my aspire one which has intel gfx, this is on F10 and it works perfectly
Section "Device" Identifier "Card0" Driver "intel" VendorName "Intel Corporation" BoardName "Mobile 945GME Express Integrated Graphics Controller" VideoRam 229376 Option "MonitorLayout" "LVDS,VGA" Option "Clone" "true" Option "AccelMethod" "EXA" Option "MigrationHeuristic" "greedy" Option "CacheLines" "1980" BusID "PCI:0:2:0" EndSection
you haven't by any chance figured out how to get LVDS to use a larger virtual screen - say 1024 x 768 have you? I've been unable to do that on my Aspire One.
Craig
no sorry craig, i think i remember reading somewhere that the only way to get the "Virtual" setting to work is to pass the "NoAccel" "true" option but i've not tried it
would you have "NoAccel" "true" instead of "AccelMethod" "EXA" ? is that the idea?
Craig
yeah that's it, let me know if it works out
---- nothing I have done so far has allowed me to have a virtual screen on the LVDS larger than 1024x600 and the above didn't work.
Presently xorg.conf on my Aspire One looks like this...
Section "ServerLayout" Identifier "single head configuration" Screen 0 "Screen0" 0 0 InputDevice "Keyboard0" "CoreKeyboard" EndSection
Section "InputDevice" # keyboard added by rhpxl Identifier "Keyboard0" Driver "kbd" Option "XkbModel" "pc105+inet" Option "XkbLayout" "us" EndSection
Section "Device" Identifier "Card0" Driver "intel" VendorName "Intel Corporation" BoardName "Mobile 945GME Express Integrated Graphics Controller" VideoRam 229376 Option "MonitorLayout" "LVDS,VGA" Option "Clone" "true" # Option "AccelMethod" "EXA" Option "NoAccel" "true" Option "MigrationHeuristic" "greedy" Option "CacheLines" "1980" BusID "PCI:0:2:0" EndSection
Section "Screen" Identifier "Screen0" Device "Card0" DefaultDepth 24 SubSection "Display" Viewport 0 0 Depth 24 Modes "1280x1024" "1024x768" "1024x600" Virtual 2048 2048 EndSubSection EndSection
and I have had various sizes in 'Virtual' from 1024 768 and 1280 1024 and have tried disabling the 'Modes' line altogether or just had it with "1280x1024" (my 19" display) but nothing has worked. I have been mostly testing things with just the built-in display because that is where I want the larger virtual screen.
;-(
Craig
On Thursday 19 March 2009 19:06, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Marko Vojinovic wrote:
and a bug that so radically affects all Intel cards is not fixed for half a year now...
It doesn't affect all Intel cards, only 945 and older. My GM965 works great in F10.
I'd say you are just being lucky:
[root@Yoda ~]# lspci -v 00:02.0 VGA compatible controller: Intel Corporation Mobile GM965/GL960 Integrated Graphics Controller (rev 03) (prog-if 00 [VGA controller]) Subsystem: Fujitsu Siemens Computers Device 110f Flags: bus master, fast devsel, latency 0, IRQ 16 Memory at fc000000 (64-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=1M] Memory at d0000000 (64-bit, prefetchable) [size=256M] I/O ports at 18f8 [size=8] Capabilities: [90] Message Signalled Interrupts: Mask- 64bit- Count=1/1 Enable- Capabilities: [d0] Power Management version 3 Kernel modules: intelfb
[root@Yoda ~]# less /var/log/Xorg.0.log.old Backtrace: 0: /usr/bin/X(xorg_backtrace+0x26) [0x4e7c96] 1: /usr/bin/X(mieqEnqueue+0x291) [0x4c87d1] 2: /usr/bin/X(xf86PostMotionEventP+0xc4) [0x4914c4] 3: /usr/bin/X(xf86PostMotionEvent+0xa9) [0x491699] 4: /usr/lib64/xorg/modules/input//evdev_drv.so [0x19f9472] 5: /usr/bin/X [0x47a795] 6: /usr/bin/X [0x46b337] 7: /lib64/libc.so.6 [0x3522232f90] 8: /lib64/libc.so.6(ioctl+0x7) [0x35222de037] 9: /usr/lib64/libdrm.so.2 [0x3538603023] 10: /usr/lib64/libdrm.so.2(drmCommandNone+0x16) [0x3538603326] 11: /usr/lib64/dri/i965_dri.so(intelSwapBuffers+0x44e) [0x13c5f95] 12: /usr/lib64/dri/i965_dri.so [0x13c03e2] 13: /usr/lib64/xorg/modules/extensions//libglx.so [0xa027ff] 14: /usr/lib64/xorg/modules/extensions//libglx.so [0x9f6656] 15: /usr/lib64/xorg/modules/extensions//libglx.so [0x9f98f2] 16: /usr/bin/X(Dispatch+0x364) [0x446904] 17: /usr/bin/X(main+0x45d) [0x42cd4d] 18: /lib64/libc.so.6(__libc_start_main+0xe6) [0x352221e576] 19: /usr/bin/X [0x42c129] [mi] mieqEnequeue: out-of-order valuator event; dropping. [mi] EQ overflowing. The server is probably stuck in an infinite loop. [mi] mieqEnequeue: out-of-order valuator event; dropping. [mi] EQ overflowing. The server is probably stuck in an infinite loop.
Best, :-) Marko
On Thursday 19 March 2009 20:12, psmith wrote:
Marko Vojinovic wrote:
On Tuesday 17 March 2009 19:18, Matthew Saltzman wrote:
<rant> So much for the famous Open Source support. If it were a nVidia bug, it would be just fixed in the next release of their closed-source driver. Even ATI's buggy flgrx driver gets fixed when the bug is severe enough. And here we are having the source completely open for the intel driver, and a bug that so radically affects all Intel cards is not fixed for half a year now... </rant>
well i've been using my aspire one on F10 since the day of the F10 release with the exa acceleration method, i'm scoring ~780 in glxgears with
glxgears -geometry 300x300+360+150
as the command, i've yet to have a X lockup or crash either and i'm using compositing in xfwm4 too, and the plymouth solar boot works well too. obviously not everyone is having such a good time with their intel gfx hardware, but not everyone is having problems either ;)
Ok, well, the "all Intel cards" part was under the <rant>. Of course there may be those unaffected. But nevertheless, this bug is far from an isolated case with one type of hardware or such. It does affect many people with a whole range of Intel hardware.
Btw, the plymouth boot didn't work for me out of the box, I still see the text-mode progress bar. Did you do anything specific to enable graphical boot?
Best, :-) Marko
Marko Vojinovic wrote:
Btw, the plymouth boot didn't work for me out of the box, I still see the text-mode progress bar. Did you do anything specific to enable graphical boot?
vga=0x318
That's the ugly vesafb hack and it will also use only 1024×768 and not your native resolution, but it does get Plymouth to show its graphical UI.
Kevin Kofler
Craig White wrote:
On Tue, 2009-03-17 at 09:49 +0000, psmith wrote:
Craig White wrote:
On Mon, 2009-03-16 at 22:25 +0000, psmith wrote:
Craig White wrote:
On Mon, 2009-03-16 at 19:14 +0000, psmith wrote:
Gordon Messmer wrote:
> M A Young wrote: > > > >> I recommend that you do a text based install (add text to the boot >> line), and once you have it installed, boot to a text console (add 3 >> to the boot line), then add Option "NoAccel" "true" to the Device >> section of /etc/X11/xorg.conf >> >> >> > I'm curious whether it's necessary to disable acceleration entirely, > or simply revert to the older XAA method. On my Thinkpad X40, the > Intel video driver in F10 had significant problems, where the driver > on F9 was fine. I could either use XAA or revert to the older driver > to get proper rendering. > > I've attached a minimal xorg.conf. I believe you can save it to > /etc/X11 to test each of the options individually. Try disabling > accel, and then try using XAA (both options are in the file). Let us > know what kind of results you get, and then track down one of the > bugzilla reports on this subject (I know a few are open) and add your > information. > > > > here is the pertinant section of the xorg.conf for my aspire one which has intel gfx, this is on F10 and it works perfectly
Section "Device" Identifier "Card0" Driver "intel" VendorName "Intel Corporation" BoardName "Mobile 945GME Express Integrated Graphics Controller" VideoRam 229376 Option "MonitorLayout" "LVDS,VGA" Option "Clone" "true" Option "AccelMethod" "EXA" Option "MigrationHeuristic" "greedy" Option "CacheLines" "1980" BusID "PCI:0:2:0" EndSection
you haven't by any chance figured out how to get LVDS to use a larger virtual screen - say 1024 x 768 have you? I've been unable to do that on my Aspire One.
Craig
no sorry craig, i think i remember reading somewhere that the only way to get the "Virtual" setting to work is to pass the "NoAccel" "true" option but i've not tried it
would you have "NoAccel" "true" instead of "AccelMethod" "EXA" ? is that the idea?
Craig
yeah that's it, let me know if it works out
nothing I have done so far has allowed me to have a virtual screen on the LVDS larger than 1024x600 and the above didn't work.
Presently xorg.conf on my Aspire One looks like this...
Section "ServerLayout" Identifier "single head configuration" Screen 0 "Screen0" 0 0 InputDevice "Keyboard0" "CoreKeyboard" EndSection
Section "InputDevice" # keyboard added by rhpxl Identifier "Keyboard0" Driver "kbd" Option "XkbModel" "pc105+inet" Option "XkbLayout" "us" EndSection
Section "Device" Identifier "Card0" Driver "intel" VendorName "Intel Corporation" BoardName "Mobile 945GME Express Integrated Graphics Controller" VideoRam 229376 Option "MonitorLayout" "LVDS,VGA" Option "Clone" "true" # Option "AccelMethod" "EXA" Option "NoAccel" "true" Option "MigrationHeuristic" "greedy" Option "CacheLines" "1980" BusID "PCI:0:2:0" EndSection
Section "Screen" Identifier "Screen0" Device "Card0" DefaultDepth 24 SubSection "Display" Viewport 0 0 Depth 24 Modes "1280x1024" "1024x768" "1024x600" Virtual 2048 2048 EndSubSection EndSection
and I have had various sizes in 'Virtual' from 1024 768 and 1280 1024 and have tried disabling the 'Modes' line altogether or just had it with "1280x1024" (my 19" display) but nothing has worked. I have been mostly testing things with just the built-in display because that is where I want the larger virtual screen.
;-(
Craig
sorry to hear that craig, but have no ther options for you to try. maybe an email to the xorg or intel driver mailing list might get you a solution, if you do figure it out be sure to let us know :)
phil
Matthew Saltzman-2 wrote:
I have a Dell P4 desktop machine with a built-in Intel graphics card. lspci reports:
00:02.0 VGA compatible controller Intel Corp 82845G/GL[Brookdale-G]/GE Chipset Integrated Graphics Device (rev 01)
The graphical installer freezes and X freezes after a short time (usually seconds or tens of seconds) after starting (even with a fully updated system). I've seen reports of issues with the Intel graphics driver on F10, but does anyone have a way of making this work or does anyone know what the status is of the driver?
I'd consider putting another card in, but the only slots in the machine are PCI and it hardly seems worth it, as I got the machine for free and it will mostly be running relatively non-graphics-intensive Windows XP stuff.
If it is any help I also have an old P4 with exactly the same Intel integrated graphics chipset, and I decided to buy a good but cheap card to plug in as I was getting so hugely frustrated with the graphics problems in F10. I got hold of a brand new Nvidia GeForce FX5200 PCI card for £33 ( I am in the UK ) and at lunchtime today found a short time to change it over. I booted to the BIOS settings page and checked that the graphics primary was selected as "auto". Then booted to F10 and moved xorg.conf to xorg.conf.prev and shut down. Then opened the box and plugged the new card in to the bottom PCI slot - closed up, moved the monitor cable from the socket for Integrated Graphics to the socket on the new card, and rebooted (using no xorg.conf at all).
The system booted up nicely, and all I then had to do was to go into the gnome settings and change the screen resolution to native for the monitor. Now all the Intel graphics problems have vanished like magic.
I felt the pain of continuing with persevering with the Intel graphics in F10 was too much to bear and the investment of £33 was well worth it to get rid of the problem. In addition there is the extra advantage that I can now use DVI instead of DSUB (analogue) and also get a higher monitor resolution than was available with the built-in graphics. So for a really small investment you turn a near brick into a usable machine again! An additional nicety is that this card has passive cooling (i.e. no fan) and no additional power leads to mess with - just plug in to PCI slot and you are good to go.
I have not tried kmod-nvidia yet but even with default drivers in F10 it works like a charm - 3d is later to try!
Hope this helps.
On Sat, 2009-03-21 at 21:52 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Mike Cloaked wrote:
I have not tried kmod-nvidia yet but even with default drivers in F10 it works like a charm - 3d is later to try!
Unfortunately, 3D will be completely nonexistent without proprietary drivers on that NVidia card.
Well, there is the nouveau driver. Not sure how stable or fast that is at this point, though.
Kevin Kofler
--- On Sat, 3/21/09, Matthew Saltzman mjs@clemson.edu wrote:
From: Matthew Saltzman mjs@clemson.edu Subject: Re: F10 and built-in Intel graphics To: "Community assistance, encouragement, and advice for using Fedora." fedora-list@redhat.com Date: Saturday, March 21, 2009, 3:02 PM On Sat, 2009-03-21 at 21:52 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Mike Cloaked wrote:
I have not tried kmod-nvidia yet but even with
default drivers in F10 it
works like a charm - 3d is later to try!
Unfortunately, 3D will be completely nonexistent
without proprietary drivers
on that NVidia card.
Well, there is the nouveau driver. Not sure how stable or fast that is at this point, though.
I can say that it is "useless", just like you say about the "Omega Live CD" because it does not have KDE :(, I would beg to differ because it is just a yum install "KDE Desktop Environment" away :)
I actually have more to back me up:
Kernel failure message 1: BUG: unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at 00000008 IP: [<f8ebe481>] :nouveau:nouveau_channel_idle+0x3f/0x9b *pdpt = 0000000033cc4001 *pde = 000000012f597067 Oops: 0000 [#1] SMP Modules linked in: nouveau drm slamr(P) ungrab_winmodem bridge stp bnep sco l2cap bluetooth sunrpc ip6t_REJECT nf_conntrack_ipv6 ip6table_filter ip6_tables ipv6 cpufreq_ondemand acpi_cpufreq dm_multipath uinput snd_hda_intel snd_seq_dummy snd_seq_oss snd_seq_midi_event arc4 snd_seq ecb snd_seq_device crypto_blkcipher snd_pcm_oss snd_mixer_oss firewire_ohci snd_pcm firewire_core crc_itu_t snd_timer snd_page_alloc snd_hwdep i2c_i801 sky2 i2c_core r8169 mii pata_jmicron snd soundcore iTCO_wdt iTCO_vendor_support usb_storage rtl8187 mac80211 eeprom_93cx6 cfg80211 pcspkr ata_generic pata_acpi [last unloaded: microcode] Mar 19 05:42:08 localhost kernel: Pid: 2970, comm: X Tainted: P (2.6.27.19-170.2.35.fc10.i686.PAE #1) P5K Deluxe EIP: 0060:[<f8ebe481>] EFLAGS: 00213297 CPU: 2 EIP is at nouveau_channel_idle+0x3f/0x9b [nouveau] EAX: 00000000 EBX: f3c89900 ECX: 00000010 EDX: fc002500 ESI: f596a800 EDI: 00000010 EBP: f3ca2e90 ESP: f3ca2e84 DS: 007b ES: 007b FS: 00d8 GS: 0033 SS: 0068 Process X (pid: 2970, ti=f3ca2000 task=f4a60cd0 task.ti=f3ca2000) Stack: f596a800 f3c89900 f5526000 f3ca2eac f8ebe575 9a56b520 00000036 ffffffea fffffffe f3c89900 f3ca2eec f8ebeaac f596aa98 f5526000 f596a800 00000001 00000001 00000001 f442e300 10000000 00000000 00000000 f596a800 f596a800 Call Trace: [<f8ebe575>] ? nouveau_fifo_free+0x70/0x149 [nouveau] [<f8ebeaac>] ? nouveau_fifo_alloc+0x3a5/0x3a7 [nouveau] [<f8ec3704>] ? nouveau_dma_channel_init+0x86/0x52a [nouveau] [<f8ebe3fc>] ? nouveau_card_init+0x72e/0x73f [nouveau] [<f8ebe415>] ? nouveau_ioctl_card_init+0x8/0xb [nouveau] [<f8dc4604>] ? drm_ioctl+0x1b0/0x225 [drm] [<f8ebe40d>] ? nouveau_ioctl_card_init+0x0/0xb [nouveau] [<c04a2868>] ? vfs_ioctl+0x50/0x69 [<c04a2abc>] ? do_vfs_ioctl+0x23b/0x247 [<c0500700>] ? selinux_file_ioctl+0x35/0x38 [<c04a2b08>] ? sys_ioctl+0x40/0x5c [<c0408b8b>] ? sysenter_do_call+0x12/0x34 ======================= Code: 52 10 81 c2 00 25 00 00 8b 3a 8b 56 14 89 f9 83 e1 fe 8b 52 10 81 c2 00 25 00 00 89 0a ff 96 84 02 00 00 3b 43 04 74 29 8b 43 44 <8b> 48 08 8b 46 1c 8b 51 0c 8b 40 10 03 42 08 8b 18 8b 41 0c 8b EIP: [<f8ebe481>] nouveau_channel_idle+0x3f/0x9b [nouveau] SS:ESP 0068:f3ca2e84 ---[ end trace ac414115b22fcdf6 ]---
I have a quad core machine, and if I want to play a DVD, I get a message that my computer is too slow to play it :(, how sad don't you think?
xine and mplayer give me the same bull :(,
I tried Xorg -configure and it gave me back nouveau driver, I type startx and it fails to start, have to reboot to get message above. I guess I do have to try to get the nvidia drivers as much as I would normally hate to do so :(
Kevin Kofler
-- Matthew Saltzman
Clemson University Math Sciences mjs AT clemson DOT edu http://www.math.clemson.edu/~mjs
--
Regards,
Antonio
Mathew,
I am sorry to post this, I meant it toward Kevin. I hope not to have offended you. I apologize in advance and hope that it is "not too late".
I can say that it is "useless", just like you say about the "Omega Live CD" because it does not have KDE :(, I would beg to differ because it is just a yum install "KDE Desktop Environment" away :)
I actually have more to back me up:
Kernel failure message 1: BUG: unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at 00000008 IP: [<f8ebe481>] :nouveau:nouveau_channel_idle+0x3f/0x9b *pdpt = 0000000033cc4001 *pde = 000000012f597067 Oops: 0000 [#1] SMP Modules linked in: nouveau drm slamr(P) ungrab_winmodem bridge stp bnep sco l2cap bluetooth sunrpc ip6t_REJECT nf_conntrack_ipv6 ip6table_filter ip6_tables ipv6 cpufreq_ondemand acpi_cpufreq dm_multipath uinput snd_hda_intel snd_seq_dummy snd_seq_oss snd_seq_midi_event arc4 snd_seq ecb snd_seq_device crypto_blkcipher snd_pcm_oss snd_mixer_oss firewire_ohci snd_pcm firewire_core crc_itu_t snd_timer snd_page_alloc snd_hwdep i2c_i801 sky2 i2c_core r8169 mii pata_jmicron snd soundcore iTCO_wdt iTCO_vendor_support usb_storage rtl8187 mac80211 eeprom_93cx6 cfg80211 pcspkr ata_generic pata_acpi [last unloaded: microcode] Mar 19 05:42:08 localhost kernel: Pid: 2970, comm: X Tainted: P (2.6.27.19-170.2.35.fc10.i686.PAE #1) P5K Deluxe EIP: 0060:[<f8ebe481>] EFLAGS: 00213297 CPU: 2 EIP is at nouveau_channel_idle+0x3f/0x9b [nouveau] EAX: 00000000 EBX: f3c89900 ECX: 00000010 EDX: fc002500 ESI: f596a800 EDI: 00000010 EBP: f3ca2e90 ESP: f3ca2e84 DS: 007b ES: 007b FS: 00d8 GS: 0033 SS: 0068 Process X (pid: 2970, ti=f3ca2000 task=f4a60cd0 task.ti=f3ca2000) Stack: f596a800 f3c89900 f5526000 f3ca2eac f8ebe575 9a56b520 00000036 ffffffea fffffffe f3c89900 f3ca2eec f8ebeaac f596aa98 f5526000 f596a800 00000001 00000001 00000001 f442e300 10000000 00000000 00000000 f596a800 f596a800 Call Trace: [<f8ebe575>] ? nouveau_fifo_free+0x70/0x149 [nouveau] [<f8ebeaac>] ? nouveau_fifo_alloc+0x3a5/0x3a7 [nouveau] [<f8ec3704>] ? nouveau_dma_channel_init+0x86/0x52a [nouveau] [<f8ebe3fc>] ? nouveau_card_init+0x72e/0x73f [nouveau] [<f8ebe415>] ? nouveau_ioctl_card_init+0x8/0xb [nouveau] [<f8dc4604>] ? drm_ioctl+0x1b0/0x225 [drm] [<f8ebe40d>] ? nouveau_ioctl_card_init+0x0/0xb [nouveau] [<c04a2868>] ? vfs_ioctl+0x50/0x69 [<c04a2abc>] ? do_vfs_ioctl+0x23b/0x247 [<c0500700>] ? selinux_file_ioctl+0x35/0x38 [<c04a2b08>] ? sys_ioctl+0x40/0x5c [<c0408b8b>] ? sysenter_do_call+0x12/0x34 ======================= Code: 52 10 81 c2 00 25 00 00 8b 3a 8b 56 14 89 f9 83 e1 fe 8b 52 10 81 c2 00 25 00 00 89 0a ff 96 84 02 00 00 3b 43 04 74 29 8b 43 44 <8b> 48 08 8b 46 1c 8b 51 0c 8b 40 10 03 42 08 8b 18 8b 41 0c 8b EIP: [<f8ebe481>] nouveau_channel_idle+0x3f/0x9b [nouveau] SS:ESP 0068:f3ca2e84 ---[ end trace ac414115b22fcdf6 ]---
I have a quad core machine, and if I want to play a DVD, I get a message that my computer is too slow to play it :(, how sad don't you think?
xine and mplayer give me the same bull :(,
I tried Xorg -configure and it gave me back nouveau driver, I type startx and it fails to start, have to reboot to get message above. I guess I do have to try to get the nvidia drivers as much as I would normally hate to do so :(
Kevin Kofler
Kevin, I am sorry also to reply that way, but you mentioned that the Omega Live CD was useless and I wanted to reply to your message but instead replied to Mathew's message. I am sorry to offend, but I felt bad and just vented out some frustration.
Please accept my aplogies.
Regards,
Antonio
Antonio Olivares wrote:
I am sorry to post this, I meant it toward Kevin. I hope not to have offended you. I apologize in advance and hope that it is "not too late".
FWIW, I know that nouveau has no working 3D support yet. That's exactly why I wrote that "3D will be completely nonexistent".
Kevin Kofler
Antonio Olivares wrote:
I can say that it is "useless", just like you say about the "Omega Live CD" because it does not have KDE :(, I would beg to differ because it is just a yum install "KDE Desktop Environment" away :)
If you have to post-install stuff anyway, why bother with an "all inclusive" remix? You can also install the stuff from RPM Fusion and Livna with a simple yum install.
Kevin Kofler
--- On Sat, 3/21/09, Kevin Kofler kevin.kofler@chello.at wrote:
From: Kevin Kofler kevin.kofler@chello.at Subject: Re: F10 and built-in Intel graphics To: fedora-list@redhat.com Date: Saturday, March 21, 2009, 7:34 PM Antonio Olivares wrote:
I can say that it is "useless", just like
you say about the "Omega Live
CD" because it does not have KDE :(, I would beg
to differ because it is
just a yum install "KDE Desktop Environment"
away :)
If you have to post-install stuff anyway, why bother with an "all inclusive" remix? You can also install the stuff from RPM Fusion and Livna with a simple yum install.
Kevin Kofler
--
True! They(Developers of Omega) should also make KDE,XFCE and why not LXDE spins of the Omega Live CD. This of course if it is possible and this way, *reminds me of the "No Child Left Behind Act, for schools"**, "No Desktop is left Behind" :) This to have justice and equal treatment for all!
Regards,
Antonio
Antonio Olivares wrote:
--- On Sat, 3/21/09, Kevin Kofler kevin.kofler@chello.at wrote:
If you have to post-install stuff anyway, why bother with an "all inclusive" remix? You can also install the stuff from RPM Fusion and Livna with a simple yum install.
Kevin Kofler
--
True! They(Developers of Omega) should also make KDE,XFCE and why not LXDE spins of the Omega Live CD. This of course if it is possible and this way, *reminds me of the "No Child Left Behind Act, for schools"**, "No Desktop is left Behind" :) This to have justice and equal treatment for all!
No time for building and testing all the different variants. If you want it to happen, step up and do the work. No amount of complaining is going to change the fact that I don't have time to build more variants.
Rahul
On Sat, 2009-03-21 at 17:55 -0700, Antonio Olivares wrote:
Mathew,
I am sorry to post this, I meant it toward Kevin. I hope not to have offended you. I apologize in advance and hope that it is "not too late".
I can say that it is "useless", just like you say about the "Omega Live CD" because it does not have KDE :(, I would beg to differ because it is just a yum install "KDE Desktop Environment" away :)
I was only going to point out that the remark about Omega Live was misattributed (I'm a GNOME user at the moment, anyway), but you already caught that.
Anyway, apology accepted.
Hi,
I got hold of a brand new Nvidia GeForce FX5200 PCI card for £33 ( I am in the UK ) and at lunchtime today found a short time to change it over.
This card was introduced in 2003 or 2004 and is only supported by nvidia's legacy drivers :-/ A cheap 8400GS (or even better an ATI card where specs are open) or something like that might have been a better choice. If you've some luck you still can exchange it.
- Clemens
Bugzilla from linuxhippy@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
I got hold of a brand new Nvidia GeForce FX5200 PCI card for £33 ( I am in the UK ) and at lunchtime today found a short time to change it over.
This card was introduced in 2003 or 2004 and is only supported by nvidia's legacy drivers :-/ A cheap 8400GS (or even better an ATI card where specs are open) or something like that might have been a better choice. If you've some luck you still can exchange it.
The 8400GS is PCI-e and won't fit in this old Dell Dimension 2400 - but I have bought one of those for my other problematic Intel integrated graphics machine (see below). In this case (Dimension 2400) even with only 2d working it is better than not working at all with Intel Integrated graphics (except with Vesa)! So even with limited support it is infinitely better than without it. This is an old machine and hails from the 2003 era so a graphics card from the same era (where only slots are PCI and not PCI-e) is quite a good choice - and that is why I bought it.
I don't actually need 3d for that machine but I may try the legacy nvidia driver (rpmfusion) at a later stage. The way it is now with the new card the machine works and there is no need for messing with xorg at all.
I have a newer machine (only a few years old) Dell Dimension 5150 with 82945 integrated graphics and I bought a newer PCI-e nvidia graphics card (8400GS) for that though I have not yet installed it in that machine, as it has been needed for other work without a break. X does work but only with the VESA driver and some fiddling with parameters, but is not entirely satisfactory (eg powersave does not work at all for the monitor!) so I will swap in the card when there is a suitable time to have a short break in operation (and grab kmod-nvidia from rpmfusion). Again though I am tired of spending time tinkering with trying to make Intel graphics work - and tired of the incessant testing and rebooting etc - I know that there is a current big effort to get Intel graphics working with KMS in F11 but I don't have time to wait for these particular machines to work properly and spending a little on a couple of graphics cards seemed the simplest way to get a working machine "now" rather than at "some time in the future"!
Both these machines worked fine until F10 - but this is a common story for many who simply upgraded working Fedora systems from pre-F10 - I know that there is a risk when working with cutting edge systems but sometimes you have to find a work around when there is no time you can afford to take out for some months with a perfectly good piece of hardware!
Mike Cloaked wrote:
The 8400GS is PCI-e and won't fit in this old Dell Dimension 2400 - but I have bought one of those for my other problematic Intel integrated graphics machine (see below). In this case (Dimension 2400) even with only 2d working it is better than not working at all with Intel Integrated graphics (except with Vesa)! So even with limited support it is infinitely better than without it. This is an old machine and hails from the 2003 era so a graphics card from the same era (where only slots are PCI and not PCI-e) is quite a good choice - and that is why I bought it.
I don't actually need 3d for that machine but I may try the legacy nvidia driver (rpmfusion) at a later stage. The way it is now with the new card the machine works and there is no need for messing with xorg at all.
I have a newer machine (only a few years old) Dell Dimension 5150 with 82945 integrated graphics and I bought a newer PCI-e nvidia graphics card (8400GS) for that though I have not yet installed it in that machine, as it has been needed for
I have now had a few minutes to install the 8400GS nvidia card (PCI-e) in the Dimension 5150 - it works like a charm with kmod-nvidia installed from rpmfusion, and fixes all issues that I previously had with the integrated graphics. glxgears now runs at around 2600 fps, powersave works properly again, and this is now a nice responsive machine .... and I have the choice of 3d if I wish.
Hopefully this machine will now last a while yet and work without having hassles - and when KMS is eventually sorted out for Intel Integrated graphics I even have the opportunity to have twin screens later!