From: Adam K K. <ad...@vo...> - 2005-03-04 19:07:38
|
Vladimir Dergachev wrote: > > > On Fri, 4 Mar 2005, Michel [ISO-8859-1] D=EF=BF=BDnzer wrote: > >> On Fri, 2005-03-04 at 01:50 +0100, Rune Petersen wrote: >> >>> >>> if ( (info->ChipFamily =3D=3D CHIP_FAMILY_R300) || >>> (info->ChipFamily =3D=3D CHIP_FAMILY_R350) || >>> - (info->ChipFamily =3D=3D CHIP_FAMILY_RV350) ) >>> + (info->ChipFamily =3D=3D CHIP_FAMILY_RV350) || >>> + (info->ChipFamily =3D=3D CHIP_FAMILY_R420) ) >>> drmInfo.func =3D DRM_RADEON_INIT_R300_CP; >>> else >>> if ( info->ChipFamily >=3D CHIP_FAMILY_R200 ) >> >> >> Why not just test for info->ChipFamily >=3D CHIP_FAMILY_R300 instead o= f >> for every R300 family explicitly? Otherwise, it looks like the R200 >> microcode will be used, which is certainly wrong... Incidentally, I >> think the R300 check in RADEONDRIScreenInit() should be moved to the t= op >> as well, or the IGP and R200 checks will preempt it? > > > I was afraid that R300 microcode would not work for newer cards as my=20 > understanding of it is somewhat limited. Do you think it would be safe=20 > to load an older microcode to a newer card ? No. Long before the r300 project began, I wanted to see what would=20 happen if I loaded r200 microcode onto my 9800. The first attempt at=20 running a GL app locked my computer solid :-) Adam |