From: Sebastian L. <11...@go...> - 2007-05-24 12:26:00
|
Hello, i compiled the whole dri (mesa + drm kernel driver ...). now mach64 complains: mach64: disagrees about version of symbol drm_open mach64: Unknown symbol drm_open ... ... mach64: disagrees about version of symbol drm_release mach64: Unknown symbol drm_release FATAL: Error inserting mach64 (/lib/modules/2.6.18-4-686/kernel/drivers/char/drm/mach64.ko): Unknown symbol in module, or unknown parameter (see dmesg) dmesg tells the same ^^ (loglevel for console :>) ----- So far for the official part. I compiled the drm as the mach64 drivers from the drm-sources (10 minutes ago). it loads fine my intel_agp agpgart and drm. just mach 64 does not like my kernel. This is debian lenny (testing). The card used is in a [b=E4h] Gericom [/b=E4h] laptop: Ati Rade 3D Pro LT The hw-table points out to use the mach64-driver with this. This is why only the mach64 was compiled by me. all Kernel headers etc. are installed. The one think i wonder, or what the Troubleshooting tells is a problem with 2.6.1 (far far beyond ^^) --- dmesg | grep drm (excluding the mach64-errors) [drm] Initialized drm 1.0.1 20051102 (i wonder if this is really my compile= d version) --- Greetings Sebastian |
From: Sebastian L. <11...@go...> - 2007-05-24 12:44:11
|
Just for completion the output of lspci -vvv Since the card is not recognized by drm 01:00.0 VGA compatible controller: ATI Technologies Inc 3D Rage LT Pro AGP-133 (rev dc) (prog-if 00 [VGA]) Subsystem: CLEVO/KAPOK Computer Unknown device 3102 Control: I/O+ Mem+ BusMaster+ SpecCycle- MemWINV- VGASnoop- ParErr- Stepping+ SERR- FastB2B- Status: Cap+ 66MHz- UDF- FastB2B+ ParErr- DEVSEL=medium >TAbort- <TAbort- <MAbort- >SERR- <PERR- Latency: 0 (2000ns min) Interrupt: pin A routed to IRQ 10 Region 0: Memory at d8000000 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=16M] Region 1: I/O ports at 8000 [size=256] Region 2: Memory at d9000000 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=4K] Expansion ROM at d0000000 [disabled] [size=128K] Capabilities: [50] AGP version 1.0 Status: RQ=256 Iso- ArqSz=0 Cal=0 SBA+ ITACoh- GART64- HTrans- 64bit- FW- AGP3- Rate=x1,x2 Command: RQ=1 ArqSz=0 Cal=0 SBA- AGP- GART64- 64bit- FW- Rate=<none> Capabilities: [5c] Power Management version 1 Flags: PMEClk- DSI- D1+ D2+ AuxCurrent=0mA PME(D0-,D1-,D2-,D3hot-,D3cold-) Status: D0 PME-Enable- DSel=0 DScale=0 PME- |
From: Sebastian L. <11...@go...> - 2007-06-01 14:44:45
|
I am still hitting the problem with my Mach64 module: (EE) ATI(0): [dri] ATIDRIScreenInit failed because of a version mismatch. [dri] mach64.ko kernel module version is 2.0.0, but version 1.0 or greater is needed. [dri] Disabling DRI. I tried building the Xorg with servers from sources, same problem. My next idea is to remove the version-check, but this would not be the intended way it ought to be. Also i thought about setting the kernel version to 1.1 instead of 2.0.0, but this is also not the intended way. Now after building everything from source i ask here once more for help. (everything refers to xservers, xorgdrivers, mesa, drm....) Running: Debian Lenny Xorg 7.1.1(7.1.0) git mesa git drm .... Need help for sure, im totally lost now (except my crazy ideas about changing version numbers) Sebastian |
From: George - <fuf...@ho...> - 2007-06-04 07:59:03
|
>From: "Sebastian Lange" <11...@go...> >To: "DRI User List" <dri...@li...> >Subject: [Dri-users] mach64 complaining about wrong version in drm-module >Date: Fri, 1 Jun 2007 16:44:42 +0200 > >I am still hitting the problem with my Mach64 module: > >(EE) ATI(0): [dri] ATIDRIScreenInit failed because of a version mismatch. >[dri] mach64.ko kernel module version is 2.0.0, but version 1.0 or greater >is needed. >[dri] Disabling DRI. > >I tried building the Xorg with servers from sources, same problem. >My next idea is to remove the version-check, but this would not be >the intended way it ought to be. Also i thought about setting >the kernel version to 1.1 instead of 2.0.0, but this is also not the >intended way. > >Now after building everything from source i ask here once more for help. >(everything refers to xservers, xorgdrivers, mesa, drm....) > >Running: >Debian Lenny >Xorg 7.1.1(7.1.0) >git mesa >git drm >.... > >Need help for sure, im totally lost now (except my crazy ideas about >changing version numbers) > >Sebastian You need to upgrade the ati driver to 6.6.191 (6.7 RC1) or later, the version of the xserver itself is irrelevant in this case. You can also check the following for more info: http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=mesa3d-dev&m=116230579900827&w=2 http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=dri-devel&m=116187769308698&w=2 hth, George. _________________________________________________________________ Don't just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/ |
From: Sebastian L. <11...@go...> - 2007-06-01 17:25:07
|
The problem still exists after installing Xorg 7.2 I think this means there is no solution within range ... Newest dri, Newest Xorg, .... nothing changes :( I=B4ll give the version-faking a chance now, reports follow tomorrow Cya folks Sebastian |
From: Micha F. <mi...@po...> - 2007-06-02 17:58:10
|
On Fri, 1 Jun 2007 19:25:05 +0200 "Sebastian Lange" <11...@go...> wrote: > The problem still exists after installing Xorg 7.2 > I think this means there is no solution within range ... > Newest dri, Newest Xorg, .... nothing changes :( >=20 > I=C2=B4ll give the version-faking a chance now, reports follow tomorrow >=20 > Cya folks > Sebastian What distribution? |
From: Micha F. <mi...@po...> - 2007-06-02 22:51:22
|
On Fri, 1 Jun 2007 19:25:05 +0200 "Sebastian Lange" <11...@go...> wrote: > The problem still exists after installing Xorg 7.2 > I think this means there is no solution within range ... > Newest dri, Newest Xorg, .... nothing changes :( >=20 > I=C2=B4ll give the version-faking a chance now, reports follow tomorrow >=20 > Cya folks > Sebastian I have debian with xorg 7.2-3 and xorg-video-ati 6.6.191 and xlibmesa-dri 6= .5.2-5 |
From: Sebastian L. <11...@go...> - 2007-06-03 13:46:32
|
OffTopic: Half success Hi again, so the "crazy" way turned out to work fine ^^ at least half the way. I just changed the Major Version in mach64_drv.h from 2 to 1 After that i deleted all libGL* libgl* in /usr/lib I also removed all *.ko in /lib/modules/=B4uname -a`/kernel/drivers/char/dr= i/ Then i started the whole buildprocess again. Copied evrything into the demanded places and run depmod -a ldconfig -------------------- DRM loads fine. Mach64 Kernel module loads fine. Mach64 dri - xorg module loads fine Xorg.0.log reports no errors anymore and shows: ATI(0): Direct rendering enabled but, in glxinfo direct rendering: no is still there I went through the Xorg-log and found some warning lines: AIGLX: Cannot shadow an accelerated frame buffer. AIGLX: 3d driver claims to not support visual 0x23 AIGLX: 3d driver claims to not support visual 0x24 . . . . AIGLX: 3d driver claims to not support visual 0x32 Some more interessting thins: drmOpenDevice: node name is /dev/dri/card0 ... openresult is -1, (No such device or address) .. this repeats for 6 lines, then: drmOpenByBusid: Searching for BusID pci:0000:01::00.0 drmOpenDevice: node name is /dev/dri/card0 drmOpenDevice: open result is 6, (OK) ... --telling a lot of drm initialization stuff --At least some more positive info: AIGLX: Loaded and initialized /usr/lib/dri/mach64_dri.so ---------------------- Now the only thing to be solved is, why is "direct rendering: no" in glxinfo Sebastian |
From: Sebastian L. <11...@go...> - 2007-06-03 14:35:03
|
Addition: The funny thing is, direct rendering: no but, OpenGL renderer string: Mesa DRI Mach64 [Rage Pro] 20051019 AGP 2x x86/MMX/SSE OpenGL version string: 1.2 Mesa 7.1 So OpenGL via dri is running hardware accelerated, but DRI itself is not direct rendered ?? -- when calling another X (without dri/glx) i get: direct rendering: no renderer string: Mesag GLX Indirect (something like this) |
From: Jan <ja...@gm...> - 2007-06-06 10:13:02
|
Hi Sebastian, I'm using Slackware current and I had the same problem like you with my mach64. I solved it by getting and installing the xorg ati driver from head. git clone git://anongit.freedesktop.org/git/xorg/driver/xf86-video-ati Now I have direct rendering working... hth, jan On Sun, 3 Jun 2007 16:34:46 +0200 "Sebastian Lange" <11...@go...> wrote: > Addition: > > The funny thing is, direct rendering: no > but, OpenGL renderer string: Mesa DRI Mach64 [Rage Pro] 20051019 AGP 2x > x86/MMX/SSE > OpenGL version string: 1.2 Mesa 7.1 > > So OpenGL via dri is running hardware accelerated, but DRI itself is not > direct rendered ?? > -- > > when calling another X (without dri/glx) i get: > direct rendering: no > renderer string: Mesag GLX Indirect (something like this) > |
From: Micha F. <mi...@po...> - 2007-05-24 12:49:04
|
On Thursday 24 May 2007 15:25, Sebastian Lange wrote: > Hello, > i compiled the whole dri (mesa + drm kernel driver ...). > now mach64 complains: > > mach64: disagrees about version of symbol drm_open > mach64: Unknown symbol drm_open > ... > ... > mach64: disagrees about version of symbol drm_release > mach64: Unknown symbol drm_release > sounds like you are using the wrong version of the drm module > FATAL: Error inserting mach64 > (/lib/modules/2.6.18-4-686/kernel/drivers/char/drm/mach64.ko): Unknown > symbol in module, or unknown parameter (see dmesg) > How did you load the drm module and from where? AFAIK debian comes with drm= =20 compiled but I'm not sure if compiled in or as a module. Have a look in=20 /lib/modules/2.6.18-4-686/kernel/drivers/char/drm/ and see if there is a drm module there (drm.ko) and do lsmod and see if drm= =20 appears. If it appears as a module, try putting that drm.ko that you compil= ed=20 in /lib/modules/2.6.18-4-686/kernel/drivers/char/drm/, run update-modules a= nd=20 then you need to either exit X, unload drm (which would be the old version)= =20 and reload it (the new version) and then restart X, or just restart the=20 system so that it can do it for you. Also look in the file /boot/config-2.6.18-4-686 or something similar, and l= ook=20 for the name CONFIG_DRM it should read CONFIG_DRM=3Dm or CONFIG_DRM=3Dn > dmesg tells the same ^^ (loglevel for console :>) > ----- > So far for the official part. > I compiled the drm as the mach64 drivers from the drm-sources (10 minutes > ago). > it loads fine my intel_agp agpgart and drm. > just mach 64 does not like my kernel. > This is debian lenny (testing). > The card used is in a [b=E4h] Gericom [/b=E4h] laptop: Ati Rade 3D Pro LT > The hw-table points out to use the mach64-driver with this. > This is why only the mach64 was compiled by me. > all Kernel headers etc. are installed. > The one think i wonder, or what the Troubleshooting tells is a problem wi= th > 2.6.1 (far far beyond ^^) > --- > > dmesg | grep drm > > (excluding the mach64-errors) > [drm] Initialized drm 1.0.1 20051102 (i wonder if this is really my > compiled version) > > --- > > Greetings > > Sebastian |