xorg 7 and ATI proprietary driver (fglrx)
Erik Steffl
latest xorg packages?
I installed fglrx packages (build the kernel module etc.) but it
doesn't seem to accept xorg 7:
(II) fglrx(0): UMM Bus area: 0xd0acb000 (size=0x07535000)
(II) fglrx(0): UMM area: 0xd0acb000 (size=0x07535000)
(II) fglrx(0): driver needs X.org 6.8.x.y with x.y >= 99.8
(II) fglrx(0): detected X.org 7.0.0.0
(II) Loading extension ATIFGLRXDRI
(II) fglrx(0): doing DRIScreenInit
drmOpenDevice: node name is /dev/dri/card0
drmOpenDevice: open result is -1, (No such device)
drmOpenDevice: open result is -1, (No such device)
drmOpenDevice: Open failed
drmOpenDevice: node name is /dev/dri/card0
drmOpenDevice: open result is -1, (No such device)
drmOpenDevice: open result is -1, (No such device)
drmOpenDevice: Open failed
[drm] failed to load kernel module "fglrx"
(II) fglrx(0): [drm] drmOpen failed
(EE) fglrx(0): DRIScreenInit failed!
(WW) fglrx(0): ***********************************************
(WW) fglrx(0): * DRI initialization failed! *
(WW) fglrx(0): * (maybe driver kernel module missing or bad) *
(WW) fglrx(0): * 2D acceleraton available (MMIO) *
(WW) fglrx(0): * no 3D acceleration available *
(WW) fglrx(0): ********************************************* *
does it mean it's not going to work until ATI releases a new driver
with support for xorg 7? Anybody had any success with the free driver
(it has at least some 3D experimental features).
relevant packages:
ii fglrx-control 8.24.8-1
ii fglrx-driver 8.24.8-1
ii fglrx-driver-dev 8.24.8-1
ii fglrx-kernel-2.6.15jojda 8.24.8-1+jojda.0
ii fglrx-kernel-src 8.24.8-1
ii xserver-xorg 7.0.22
TIA,
erik
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
Richard
I also had a lot of trouble to get this going on debian ... it seems
the fglrx driver doesn't like it when the kernel was compiled with
including CONFIG_DRM=y and CONFIG_DRM_RADEON=y ... When you compiled
this kernel-module you also have to modprobe this into the kernel "modprobe
fglrx" ... when DRM was already compiled into the kernel this modprobe
will fail.
Erik Steffl
though, xorg log says:
(II) fglrx(0): DRI initialization successfull!
and lsmod confirms that fglrx is loaded
but then fglrxinfo says:
display: :0.0 screen: 0
OpenGL vendor string: Mesa project: www.mesa3d.org
OpenGL renderer string: Mesa GLX Indirect
OpenGL version string: 1.2 (1.5 Mesa 6.4.1)
despite the fact the ldd confirms that /usr/lib/libGL.so.1 is used
which is a diversion by fglrx-driver to:
/usr/lib/fglrx/diversions/libGL.so.1
and the openGL programs are slow so I'm pretty sure software
rendering is used.
any ideas where to go from here? Would you (or somebody else) mind
posting relevant parts of xorg.conf (and perhaps kernel but I guess I
have that part working since the kernel module is loaded)
TIA
erik
Richard
> thanks, seems like changing kernel config helped, still no cigar
> though, xorg log says:
>
> (II) fglrx(0): DRI initialization successfull!
>
> and lsmod confirms that fglrx is loaded
>
> but then fglrxinfo says:
>
> display: :0.0 screen: 0
> OpenGL vendor string: Mesa project: www.mesa3d.org
> OpenGL renderer string: Mesa GLX Indirect
> OpenGL version string: 1.2 (1.5 Mesa 6.4.1)
>
> despite the fact the ldd confirms that /usr/lib/libGL.so.1 is used
> which is a diversion by fglrx-driver to:
> /usr/lib/fglrx/diversions/libGL.so.1
>
> and the openGL programs are slow so I'm pretty sure software
> rendering is used.
>
> any ideas where to go from here? Would you (or somebody else) mind
> posting relevant parts of xorg.conf (and perhaps kernel but I guess I
> have that part working since the kernel module is loaded)
>
> TIA
>
> erik
>
Section "Device"
Identifier "ATI Video Card"
Driver "fglrx"
VendorName "ATI"
BoardName "Ati Radeon 9550"
Option "RenderAccel" "true"
Option "UseInternalAGPGART" "no"
Option "KernelModuleParm" "agplock=0"
Option "NoLogo" "true"
Option "HWCursor" "true"
BusID "PCI:1:0:0"
EndSection
Maybe there are still a lot of other options i can use in this section
but i am not yet aware of them.
This is the relevant part of my kernel config
CONFIG_AGP=y
# CONFIG_AGP_ALI is not set
# CONFIG_AGP_ATI is not set
# CONFIG_AGP_AMD is not set
# CONFIG_AGP_AMD64 is not set
# CONFIG_AGP_INTEL is not set
# CONFIG_AGP_NVIDIA is not set
# CONFIG_AGP_SIS is not set
# CONFIG_AGP_SWORKS is not set
CONFIG_AGP_VIA=y
# CONFIG_AGP_EFFICEON is not set
# CONFIG_DRM is not set
# CONFIG_MWAVE is not set
# CONFIG_CS5535_GPIO is not set
# CONFIG_RAW_DRIVER is not set
Liam O'Toole
Erik Steffl <ste...@bigfoot.com> wrote:
> Is it possible to make ATI proprietary driver fglrx work with the
> latest xorg packages?
Yes. I have fglrx working with xorg and the stock Debian 686 kernel in
an up-to-date sid installation.
The first thing you should do is ignore xorg and check whether the
fglrx kernel module can be loaded. What does 'modprobe fglrx' tell you?
--
Liam
Erik Steffl
> On Sun, 18 Jun 2006 19:16:15 -0700
> Erik Steffl <ste...@bigfoot.com> wrote:
>
>> Is it possible to make ATI proprietary driver fglrx work with the
>> latest xorg packages?
>
> Yes. I have fglrx working with xorg and the stock Debian 686 kernel in
> an up-to-date sid installation.
>
> The first thing you should do is ignore xorg and check whether the
> fglrx kernel module can be loaded. What does 'modprobe fglrx' tell you?
I removed drm from kernel and now the module is loaded:
jojda:/home/erik# lsmod | grep fglrx
fglrx 462048 -
and even xorg log indicates that everything works, at least I think
that's what this message means:
(II) fglrx(0): DRI initialization successfull!
but it's still not working, fglrxinfo says:
display: :0.0 screen: 0
OpenGL vendor string: Mesa project: www.mesa3d.org
OpenGL renderer string: Mesa GLX Indirect
OpenGL version string: 1.2 (1.5 Mesa 6.4.1)
any ideas?
erik
Liam O'Toole
Erik Steffl <ste...@bigfoot.com> wrote:
Do you load the GLcore module explicitly in the "Module" section
of xorg.conf? If so then remove that line.
--
Liam
Erik Steffl
no I don't, here's the module section of my xorg.conf:
Section "Module"
# erik: does not exist: Load "GLcore"
Load "bitmap"
Load "dbe"
Load "ddc"
# erik: nvidia doesn't use it: Load "dri"
Load "extmod"
Load "freetype"
# Load "glx"
Load "int10"
# erik: does not exist: Load "pex5"
Load "record"
# erik: no symbols found: Load "speedo"
Load "type1"
Load "vbe"
# erik: does not exist: Load "xie"
# erik: for ati radeon 9800
# This loads the miscellaneous extensions module, and disables
# initialisation of the XFree86-DGA extension within that module.
SubSection "extmod"
Option "omit xfree86-dga" # don't initialise the DGA extension
EndSubSection
# This loads the GLX module
Load "glx" # libglx.a
Load "dri" # libdri.a
EndSection
see anything suspicious?
erik
Liam O'Toole
Erik Steffl <ste...@bigfoot.com> wrote:
[SNIP]
No, that looks OK.
The next thing I would check is that various symlinks in /usr/lib/
point to the fglrx libraries rather than the mesa ones. You should
at least look at /usr/lib/libGL.so* and /usr/lib/libGLcore.so*. The
command 'strace fglrx' will help you to identify any others.
--
Liam
Erik Steffl
> On Mon, 19 Jun 2006 12:04:58 -0700
> Erik Steffl <ste...@bigfoot.com> wrote:
>
> [SNIP]
>
> The next thing I would check is that various symlinks in /usr/lib/
> point to the fglrx libraries rather than the mesa ones. You should
> at least look at /usr/lib/libGL.so* and /usr/lib/libGLcore.so*. The
> command 'strace fglrx' will help you to identify any others.
I checked that before and it looks ok (diversion by fglrx-driver to:
/usr/lib/fglrx/diversions/libGL.so.1.2) however I did strace fglrxinfo
and here's what it revealed:
open("/usr/X11R6/lib/modules/dri//fglrx_dri.so", O_RDONLY) = -1 ENOENT
(No such file or directory)
it indeed is not in that directory (it's in /usr/lib/dri/fglrx_dri.so).
now imagine this, it turns out that ATI tools modified my
/etc/profile (2005/07/13 or before):
### START ATI FGLRX ###
### Automatically modified by ATI Proprietary driver scripts
### Please do not modify between START ATI FGLRX and END ATI FGLRX
...
doing nasty things with LD_LIBRARY_PATH, LIBGL_DRIVERS_PATH which is
why it didn't work. One simple command (unset LIBGL_DRIVERS_PATH) and it
works again.
thanks a lot for the pointers!
erik
Liam O'Toole
Erik Steffl <ste...@bigfoot.com> wrote:
I would be really furious in your position. Presumably the Debian
packages are better behaved.
>
> thanks a lot for the pointers!
You're welcome.
>
> erik
>
>
--
Liam
Ron Johnson
Hash: SHA1
Liam O'Toole wrote:
> On Mon, 19 Jun 2006 23:51:34 -0700
> Erik Steffl <ste...@bigfoot.com> wrote:
>
>> Liam O'Toole wrote:
>>> On Mon, 19 Jun 2006 12:04:58 -0700
>>> Erik Steffl <ste...@bigfoot.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> [SNIP]
>>>
[snip]
>> now imagine this, it turns out that ATI tools modified my
>> /etc/profile (2005/07/13 or before):
>>
>> ### START ATI FGLRX ###
>> ### Automatically modified by ATI Proprietary driver scripts
>> ### Please do not modify between START ATI FGLRX and END ATI FGLRX
>> ...
>>
>> doing nasty things with LD_LIBRARY_PATH, LIBGL_DRIVERS_PATH which
>> is why it didn't work. One simple command (unset LIBGL_DRIVERS_PATH)
>> and it works again.
>
> I would be really furious in your position. Presumably the Debian
> packages are better behaved.
Is there an ATI Debian package?
AFAICT, the NVIDIA binary driver install app (not the Debian
package, but the one directly from nvidia.com) is well-behaved.
(The only file it seems to modify is xorg.conf, and puts it's files
in standard locations.)
- --
Ron Johnson, Jr.
Jefferson LA USA
Is "common sense" really valid?
For example, it is "common sense" to white-power racists that
whites are superior to blacks, and that those with brown skins
are mud people.
However, that "common sense" is obviously wrong.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFEl+fyS9HxQb37XmcRAkJ2AJ9znqseioctF0IugHyFONgabbWZIwCgxpfZ
hHfNKVPlcjn/wAsGELIg/Zo=
=6ii1
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Liam O'Toole
Ron Johnson <ron.l....@cox.net> wrote:
[SNIP]
> Is there an ATI Debian package?
Yes, but only in unstable. The packages of interest are fglrx-driver
and fglrx-kernel-src. The latter can conveniently be built using
module-assistant. I use these on my Thinkpad, although they can
be a bit flaky.
>
> AFAICT, the NVIDIA binary driver install app (not the Debian
> package, but the one directly from nvidia.com) is well-behaved.
> (The only file it seems to modify is xorg.conf, and puts it's files
> in standard locations.)
>
I use the Debian nvidia packages on my cheap-and-cheerful desktop
machine. They are very reliable, and I haven't noticed any packaging
misconduct.
[SNIP]
--
Liam
Erik Steffl
> On Tue, 20 Jun 2006 07:20:02 -0500
> Ron Johnson <ron.l....@cox.net> wrote:
>
> [SNIP]
>
>> Is there an ATI Debian package?
>
> Yes, but only in unstable. The packages of interest are fglrx-driver
> and fglrx-kernel-src. The latter can conveniently be built using
> module-assistant. I use these on my Thinkpad, although they can
> be a bit flaky.
that's what I'm using but I think the ATI change in /etc/profile was
from before, back from times when I used their rpm package (converted to
deb)
overall the quality of the driver and packaging is pretty sad, like
freezing if you have more than one X server or not being able to get
console back after X server exits, nasty behavior like writing into
/etc/profile, aticonfig overwriting (and rearranging in weird ways) your
xorg.conf (at least they create a backup) etc. Considering they could
get people doing the stuff for free (there is an ongoing effort to
create free drivers) it is kinda funny...
<vent>look how far we got since the days of free and pretty much
perfect drivers for voodoo with openGL and everything</vent>
erik