From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Jean Delvare" Subject: Re: Re: 2.6.12-rc1-mm2 -- nvidiafb driver gives black screen Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 11:16:58 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: References: Reply-To: linux-fbdev-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from sc8-sf-mx1-b.sourceforge.net ([10.3.1.11] helo=sc8-sf-mx1.sourceforge.net) by sc8-sf-list1.sourceforge.net with esmtp (Exim 4.30) id 1DGCuK-0008Av-To for linux-fbdev-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 29 Mar 2005 01:21:08 -0800 Received: from zone4.gcu-squad.org ([213.91.10.50] ident=root) by sc8-sf-mx1.sourceforge.net with esmtp (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.41) id 1DGCuH-0006yB-Td for linux-fbdev-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 29 Mar 2005 01:21:08 -0800 In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-fbdev-devel-admin@lists.sourceforge.net Errors-To: linux-fbdev-devel-admin@lists.sourceforge.net List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: miles.lane@gmail.com, rddunlap@osdl.org Cc: linux-fbdev-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, adaplas@pol.net Hi gentle folks, > Perhaps you are thinking I am using the NVidia binary driver? > This is not the case. nvidiafb is a recently added framebuffer > driver (IIRC, first showing up in 2.6.12-rc1-mm2). I believe > khali@linux-fr.org is the author. I am not! Antonino Daplas is. Adding him to the CC list, although I guess he reads linux-fbdev-devel. The only part I can help with is the i2c stuff, which caused trouble already, but so far I couldn't find anything relevant. The nvidiafb driver is quite new, and it's natural that it needs some debugging. I suspect that the driver has some severe problem with the way it handles resources, as was suggested by our previous (failed) attempts to debug it. I'd be happy to help with the debugging but unfortunately (no quite so) I don't have any nvidia device in my machines anymore. Somewhere else in this thread, Randy suggested that some __devinit stuff wasn't really. I think it would be worth investigating this first, and make sure that nothing is incorrectly tagged. The oops reported by Miles sounded like large memory chunks had been freed when they shouldn't have. I think I understand that erroneously tagging things __init might lead to that kind of trouble. But maybe it's a completely different problem, I'm really only suggesting this because I don't get what's going on either. Thanks, -- Jean Delvare ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by Demarc: A global provider of Threat Management Solutions. Download our HomeAdmin security software for free today! http://www.demarc.com/info/Sentarus/hamr30