* XFree, E, and refresh rates... [not found] <Pine.LNX.4.10.9911151747090.699-100000@opus.bloom.county> @ 1999-11-16 18:18 ` Matt Haffner 1999-11-16 21:10 ` Tom Rini 0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread From: Matt Haffner @ 1999-11-16 18:18 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Tom Rini, atong; +Cc: linuxppc-dev Tom Rini wrote (in the user list): > ftp://devel.linuxppc.org/users/trini/XFree86-3.3.5, but they're quite old > & out of date again. Something new & improved <g> RSN. Tom, Anthony, et al., I was curious if any of you had seen my posting on the users list a bit ago about problems that cropped up with Enlightenment 0.16 related to monitor refresh rates (B&W/400). There are two minor issues on this topic. (1) There seems to be a general problem (at least on my system... I haven't seen corroboration yet) that XFree chooses the _lowest_ vertical refresh modeline instead of the highest one supported by the monitor. I have lines like HorizSync 30.0-95.0 VertRefresh 50.0-152.0 correctly put there by Xconfigurator for my monitor (& double checked by me). Nonetheless, a default XFConfig file results in an X session at 60Hz. To force higher refresh rates, I need to comment out modelines for the lower ones explicitly. (2) Recently I installed Enlightenment 0.16 on top of Tom's 3.3.5 XFree and Anthony's aty128fb (unaccelerated at that time). I had been using the stock Enlightenment 0.15 with X running in 24-bit depth and a modeline that gave me a refresh rate of something like 85 Hz. With the new Enlightenment, X wouldn't even start dying with Fatal server error: Caught signal 11. Server aborting Finding it worked at home on my PowerBase, I played around with the XConfig file the next day. Strangely enough, E 0.16 only wanted to work at lower refresh rates! I was forced to use 75 Hz at my current resolution (1280x1024). Odd, but I could deal with it... Then I installed Anthony's newest Rage128 accelerated fbdev last week. The same error cropped up again. Fortunately, switching to a new modeline fixed the problem, but now I'm forced to run at 60-70Hz. Oddly enough, a session run from gdm works at 70Hz, but one started in a console via startx only works at 60Hz. Any ideas? The odd thing for me is that a _window manager_ (or how it's driving X) cares about my refresh rate. Think there is anything I can do on this end to probe this more? I'd love to dive in with my hack 'n slash debugging skills, but X is a bit too scary of a beast for me right now :) Thanks for getting us this far! mh -- Matt Haffner /|------|\ University of Wisconsin Dept. of Astronomy /|--------|\ Madison haffner@astro.wisc.edu /|----------|\ WHAM project -- http://www.astro.wisc.edu/wham ** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: XFree, E, and refresh rates... 1999-11-16 18:18 ` XFree, E, and refresh rates Matt Haffner @ 1999-11-16 21:10 ` Tom Rini 1999-11-16 21:36 ` Matt Haffner 0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread From: Tom Rini @ 1999-11-16 21:10 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Matt Haffner; +Cc: atong, linuxppc-dev On Tue, 16 Nov 1999, Matt Haffner wrote: > I was curious if any of you had seen my posting on the users list a bit > ago about problems that cropped up with Enlightenment 0.16 related to > monitor refresh rates (B&W/400). There are two minor issues on this > topic. E 0.16.2 & anthonys FBDev seem happy here.. > There seems to be a general problem (at least on my system... I haven't > seen corroboration yet) that XFree chooses the _lowest_ vertical refresh > modeline instead of the highest one supported by the monitor. I have > lines like It takes the 1st one that fits, iirc. --- Tom Rini (TR1265) http://gate.crashing.org/~trini/ ** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: XFree, E, and refresh rates... 1999-11-16 21:10 ` Tom Rini @ 1999-11-16 21:36 ` Matt Haffner 1999-11-16 21:52 ` Tom Rini 0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread From: Matt Haffner @ 1999-11-16 21:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Tom Rini; +Cc: atong, linuxppc-dev Tom Rini wrote: > > On Tue, 16 Nov 1999, Matt Haffner wrote: > > > I was curious if any of you had seen my posting on the users list a bit > > ago about problems that cropped up with Enlightenment 0.16 related to > > monitor refresh rates (B&W/400). There are two minor issues on this > > topic. > > E 0.16.2 & anthonys FBDev seem happy here.. OK... I'll have to try out 16.2. I've got 16.1 installed right now. Odd... > > There seems to be a general problem (at least on my system... I haven't > > seen corroboration yet) that XFree chooses the _lowest_ vertical refresh > > modeline instead of the highest one supported by the monitor. I have > > lines like > > It takes the 1st one that fits, iirc. Ahhhh... Thanks. I see my misunderstanding with this now. In the XF86Config file, there's a statement: vvvv # monitor). With these modes, the best standard mode that your monitor # and video card can support for a given resolution is automatically # used. I had interpreted that to mean best refresh rate (and thought I read that elsewhere too). But checking the man page it says it takes the first valid one. Is it possible then for XConfigurator spit out the modelines in reverse order from what it does now? It looks like it's in order of increasing hsync right now, but maybe decreasing hsync or vrefresh would be better? That way we get the highest refresh rate right out of the box. Totally trival though :) Thanks again... mh -- Matt Haffner /|------|\ University of Wisconsin Dept. of Astronomy /|--------|\ Madison haffner@astro.wisc.edu /|----------|\ WHAM project -- http://www.astro.wisc.edu/wham ** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: XFree, E, and refresh rates... 1999-11-16 21:36 ` Matt Haffner @ 1999-11-16 21:52 ` Tom Rini 0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread From: Tom Rini @ 1999-11-16 21:52 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Matt Haffner; +Cc: linuxppc-dev On Tue, 16 Nov 1999, Matt Haffner wrote: > Is it possible then for XConfigurator spit out the modelines in reverse > order from what it does now? It looks like it's in order of increasing > hsync right now, but maybe decreasing hsync or vrefresh would be better? > That way we get the highest refresh rate right out of the box. Totally > trival though :) I'll be beating up Xconfigurator soon, so we shall see. --- Tom Rini (TR1265) http://gate.crashing.org/~trini/ ** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~1999-11-16 21:52 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <Pine.LNX.4.10.9911151747090.699-100000@opus.bloom.county>
1999-11-16 18:18 ` XFree, E, and refresh rates Matt Haffner
1999-11-16 21:10 ` Tom Rini
1999-11-16 21:36 ` Matt Haffner
1999-11-16 21:52 ` Tom Rini
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).