From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>
To: Michel Lanners <mlan@cpu.lu>
Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.linuxppc.org
Subject: Re: controlfb: please test!
Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2000 14:32:59 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20000318143259.A11235@drow.res.cmu.edu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200003180903.KAA00291@piglet.grunz.lu>; from mlan@cpu.lu on Sat, Mar 18, 2000 at 10:03:05AM +0100
Well, first of all, there are two different 'current' controlfb's. One
of them is in the PPC 2.2 tree and the other in the 2.3 tree (both
bitkeeper), I believe. Did you try both of those? I'm pretty sure I
fixed this quite thoroughly in one or the other.
I admit (ashamedly) to not remembering which.
Actually, on closer look, I thought that the 2.3 code was correct.
Could you compare to Andrew's observations in the comment above the
code? Is he wrong? I certainly can't see how his comment would be
unless there is a memory scheme he was not detecting, and I do not
think there is.
I have a bunch of other patches to merge for controlfb anyway, so now
is a good time to straighten this out... with luck and speed we can get
a fix into 2.3.99preX.
On Sat, Mar 18, 2000 at 10:03:05AM +0100, Michel Lanners wrote:
> Hi list,
>
> You may remeber my problems (and the many other problems reported over
> the years ;-) with controlfb's detection of the amount of VRAM
> installed.
>
> Well, it seems control has some bugs, which makes detection less easy,
> and until now, only one of two possible schemes for the memory layout
> was correctly detected.
>
> Well, I think it's time to clean this mess up, so I want _all_
> developers with any machine that has the control hardware
> (PowerMacs 7300, 7500, 7600, 8500, 8600, clones?) to try the following
> patch on a 2.3 kernel, and report the results to me.
>
> Mine look like this, with 2 MB in bank2:
> ....
> control: mem at 0x000000: no
> control: mem at 0x200000: no
> control: mem at 0x400000: no
> control: mem at 0x600000: yes
> controlfb: Memory bank 1 absent, bank 2 present, total VRAM 2MB
> ....
>
> Please include yur VRAM configuration, and if you have the time, please
> try all possible combinations (2MB in either bank1 or bank2, and 4MB).
Dan
/--------------------------------\ /--------------------------------\
| Daniel Jacobowitz |__| SCS Class of 2002 |
| Debian GNU/Linux Developer __ Carnegie Mellon University |
| dan@debian.org | | dmj+@andrew.cmu.edu |
\--------------------------------/ \--------------------------------/
** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2000-03-18 19:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2000-03-18 9:03 controlfb: please test! Michel Lanners
2000-03-18 19:32 ` Daniel Jacobowitz [this message]
2000-03-19 8:30 ` Michel Lanners
2000-03-19 8:46 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2000-03-19 11:41 ` Michel Lanners
2000-03-19 18:24 ` Michel Lanners
2000-03-19 21:53 ` Michael R. Zucca
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20000318143259.A11235@drow.res.cmu.edu \
--to=drow@false.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.linuxppc.org \
--cc=mlan@cpu.lu \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).