Re: G550DH + G450DH Framebuffer succes & directfb question.

[Svetoslav S. <sv...@gm...>]

> >
> >>I don't think the matroxset commands where 
> >>meant to be used with the ruby kernel.
> >>    
> >>
> >
> >there is nothing wrong with matroxset with ruby,
> >and it's the only way to separate the outputs 
> >of the two heads of G4x0DH or G550DH
> >else both fbdevs are mirrored :(
> >
> >does anyone have a better solution ?
> >  
> >
> I'm considering patching it so it'll boot up with separate outputs instead
> of mirroring by default.  This should ideally be a kernel command
> line option, as the current default is useful for those with only one
> screen.  (But then, why get a G550 if you use one screen only . . .)

Petr, refused to help me on this issue,
do you have idea how to patch it ?
IMHO if we figure out how to patch it,
it shouldn't be that hard to add the boot option

 
> >( 
> >of course it would be great to get independant fbcon 
> >without matroxset, but i'm not aware of such possibility
> >)
> >
> >  
> >
> 
> >>>P.S.
> >>>Did any of you have any success setting up dual independent
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>(accelerated) X
> >>    
> >>
> >>>servers on the G550? I'm very interested to see your XF86Config!
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>Me too. I like to give a demo of that.
> >>    
> >>
> >
> >IMO, this is only possible with the Matrox MMS series cards (G200 or
> G450)
> >two/ four heads by choice(pocket) , but they are really too
> >expensive
> >it's just that the hardware is missing
> >  
> >
> It is possible on a G550, _if_ you stick to 2D-accelearation only.
> Recipe:
> Install a ruby kernel, get it going with two independent consoles.
> Also connect two independent mice.
> Using framebuffers is one way to achieve this.
> 
> Install the accelerated X server.
> Run two such servers, on separate tty's so they will run simultaneously.
> Use two mostly identical XF86Config's, they should specify separate
> mice though. At least one of them must use a software mouse cursor,
> as the G550 only have one of these.
> No need for any prefbusid/isolatedevice because they run on the same
> card - and therefore they don't try to disable each other's cards.
> 
> This works in practice, the two servers didn't corrupt each others state,
> not even with a smp machine that really lets the two drivers execute
> simultaneously.
> 
> This recipe gives two independent accelerated xservers, using separate
> keyboards & mice.  Unfortunately they happen to run on the same
> screen, and tend to paint over each other all the time.
> I didn't go further than this, but believe you can use xinerama
> and simply tell the users to not abuse into each other's screens.
> Perhaps it is possible to do better than that - if anyone can
> figure out how to run accelerated X on the second head _only_.
> (First head only id trivial - it is the standard setup with xinerama off.)
> 
> Note that this didn't work well with 3D, last time I tried.
> One server using 3D blocks the other xserver 99% of the time, meaning
> the other user can't  work efficiently if the first user is using a game.
> Even 2D operations get blocked like this.  3D on both servers were
> impossible, even though two 3D clients on a single server works fine.

IMHO this is just a happy coinsidence,
and not a proper solution

> Things seems to happen fast on the DRI front, but I don't really
> expect this to work anytime soon.  Virtualizing the 3D accelerator
> will make this "easy", but the implied slowdown might not be
> desireable. 

yep, but IIRC DRI is still single card only :(

> Zoltán Böszörményi already showed dual 3D using two independent cards
> though, I believe that is the way to go for dual gaming.

i had it running on two PC's for a long time,
DRI + NVidia, and IIRC there must be a lot of
users with multiple NVidia cards
it's sort of sad that in order to have
multiple 3D accelerated users you MUST use NVidia
closed source drivers

best,

svetljo

-- 
NEU : GMX Internet.FreeDSL
Ab sofort DSL-Tarif ohne Grundgebühr: http://www.gmx.net/dsl