From: Alex D. <ale...@gm...> - 2005-02-03 18:39:09
|
On Thu, 03 Feb 2005 19:44:57 +0100, Rune Petersen <ru...@ma...> wrote: > Vladimir Dergachev wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, 3 Feb 2005, Rune Petersen wrote: > > > >> Vladimir Dergachev wrote: > >> > >>>> > >>>> X is 1280x1024 and the lessons uses 640x480 in full screen. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> I put back a single PFS_NOP as the syntax does not allow for less > >>> than 1 instruction (alu_end==0 corresponds to 1 instruction). > >> > >> You are right, but why do we get away with having 0 tex instruction? > >> It should be under the same restrictions. > > > > > > There is a special bit that tells whether node0 has texture instructions > > - it is not set for FLAT_COLOR_PIPELINE. > > > >>> > >>> Does this fix things for you ? > >> > >> No, I need 2. > > > > > > Do you still see the same problem by stretching the window as large as > > it can be ? > > there are no problems with stretching the window > > I've experimented and found that 2 NOPs doesn't really help. > if I set full screen to be the LCDs native resolution it happens less often. > I think this problem DVI-related. Until I or someone else can show the > problem is with the r300 code you should leave this alone. > > Do you know who is responsible for the DVI-code? > lots of people have touched that. it could be related to the display buffer watermark code. perhaps it needs some tweaks for your chip. take a look at radeon_driver.c::RADEONInitDispBandwidth() it looks like the r420 isn't supported quite yet: /* R420 family not supported yet */ if (info->ChipFamily == CHIP_FAMILY_R420) return; Alex |