From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: by oss.sgi.com id ; Tue, 22 Aug 2000 09:29:09 -0700 Received: from deliverator.sgi.com ([204.94.214.10]:34319 "EHLO deliverator.sgi.com") by oss.sgi.com with ESMTP id ; Tue, 22 Aug 2000 09:29:00 -0700 Received: from cthulhu.engr.sgi.com (gate3-relay.engr.sgi.com [130.62.1.234]) by deliverator.sgi.com (980309.SGI.8.8.8-aspam-6.2/980310.SGI-aspam) via ESMTP id JAA22613 for ; Tue, 22 Aug 2000 09:21:23 -0700 (PDT) mail_from (ehab@aia067.aia.rwth-aachen.de) Received: from sgi.com (sgi.engr.sgi.com [192.26.80.37]) by cthulhu.engr.sgi.com (980427.SGI.8.8.8/970903.SGI.AUTOCF) via ESMTP id JAA22893; Tue, 22 Aug 2000 09:28:41 -0700 (PDT) mail_from (ehab@aia067.aia.RWTH-Aachen.DE) Received: from aia067.aia.RWTH-Aachen.DE (aia067.aia.RWTH-Aachen.DE [134.130.140.67]) by sgi.com (980327.SGI.8.8.8-aspam/980304.SGI-aspam: SGI does not authorize the use of its proprietary systems or networks for unsolicited or bulk email from the Internet.) via ESMTP id JAA01932; Tue, 22 Aug 2000 09:28:37 -0700 (PDT) mail_from (ehab@aia067.aia.RWTH-Aachen.DE) Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by aia067.aia.RWTH-Aachen.DE (8.9.3/8.9.3/SuSE Linux 8.9.3-0.1) id SAA08887; Tue, 22 Aug 2000 18:28:30 +0200 From: Ehab Fares To: Shrijeet Mukherjee Subject: Re: [linux-fbdev] SGI VW 540, fbdev... and other stuff Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 17:59:43 +0200 X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.0.28] Content-Type: text/plain Cc: linux-fbdev@vuser.vu.union.edu, Linux porting team References: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <00082218283000.08755@aia067> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: owner-linux-mips@oss.sgi.com Precedence: bulk Return-Path: X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-mips-outgoing On Tue, 22 Aug 2000, Shrijeet Mukherjee wrote: > Well as I have tried to explain in the past the situation is not as cut > and dry as all that. For most hardware systems, well written driver code > is a good place to start. (in fact al of the internal port to linux for > the 320 was done without formal docs, or the engg's to talk to) > > The real problem is that the 320 gfx family uses a SGI style > high-performance which is different from the AGP style approach that the > other guys use. Porting this to linux .. or more than knowing how the > hardware works .. since we need to port a very complicated mechanism, for > which linux may not have obvious and ready replacements. > > On top of that .. there are potentially Intellectual Property issues with > the management style. Thus the concerns with just releasing the specs. > > Since this is a recurring question, are there people on this list that are > personally motivated to try and port this system over ? > We are using a 540 system with the top configuration (4 processors, 2GB Ram and the flat panel 1600SW). We are certainly motivated to get linux and the X-Server working poperly. As already posted in this mailing list the X-server is not the only problem. I therefore would suggest to start collecting all the problems that should be solved and look for people interested in working on the port. The problems we have are: 1) new kernels simply wouldn'[t boot the machine. I got the machine working with the 2.2.10 patched kernel. All the four processors are working. 2) We have only 960 MB Ram of the installed 2GB working. 3) strange behaviour of the keyboard. 4) the parallel port is not working. (we haven't tested the rest of the ports) 5) very poor X performance with hangs every now and then which is probably because of the X-Server. Are there other people having similar or other problems and interested in solving them? Is there anyone who have the experience or knowledge of that system (and linux) who can help? I personally would like to help but need some information and details as I'm not a kernel hacker. Ehab.