Re: [2.6.1] fbdev console: can't load vga=791 and yes vga=ask!

Kiko Piris
2004-01-29T20:03:50Z

On 27/01/2004 at 23:37, James Simmons wrote:

> > In 2.6.1 I could use framebuffer through vesafb just with that parameter
> > (vga=795, ie. 1280x10224 16M).
>
> This is very strange.

Well, back home again and I've been able to do some tests.

vesafb boots fine with 2.6.2-rc2, just I have to specify the parameter
suggested by Zack Winkles : "vga=0795 video=vesafb:ywrap,pmipal,mtrr"

> Give it a try. If you have problems use my patch at
>
> http://phoenix.infradead.org/~jsimmons/fbdev.diff.gz
>
> > Althoug, I would prefer to use radeonfb instead of vesafb (radeonfb
> > turns off my monitor and vesafb does not).
> >
> > Anyone with a Radeon 9200 does use radeonfb ? If yes, any special boot
> > parameter?
>
> Try my newest patch. It has a updated radeon driver.

I tried the patch you mention here:

http://phoenix.infradead.org/~jsimmons/fbdev.diff.gz

against 2.6.1 (it does not apply to 2.6.2-rc2) and it does not work for
me. I can only use 640x480. Any other resolution I try results in an
usupported frequency for my monitor.

My graphics card is:

# lspci -s 01:00.1 -v
01:00.1 Display controller: ATI Technologies Inc: Unknown device 5d44 (rev 01)
Subsystem: Unknown device 18bc:0171
Flags: bus master, 66Mhz, medium devsel, latency 32
Memory at d8000000 (32-bit, prefetchable) [size=128M]
Memory at e5010000 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=64K]
Capabilities: [50] Power Management version 2

Please let me know if I can try anything else. I'll be very glad to test
it (so I can use radeonfb, because as I said, I prefer it over vesafb).

TIA.

--
Kiko