Re: matroxfb on SMP alpha
Hi,
On Fri, Jan 24, 2003 at 05:11:13PM -0600, Bob McElrath wrote:
> > What does "lspci -v" show?
>
> 01:04.0 VGA compatible controller: Matrox Graphics, Inc. MGA G200 (rev 01) (prog-if 00 [VGA])
> Subsystem: Matrox Graphics, Inc. Marvel G200
> Flags: bus master, medium devsel, latency 32, IRQ 52
> Memory at 0000000209000000 (32-bit, prefetchable) [size=16M]
> Memory at 000000020aa10000 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=16K]
> Memory at 000000020a000000 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=8M]
> Expansion ROM at 000000020aa00000 [disabled] [size=64K]
> Capabilities: [dc] Power Management version 1
>
> I wonder if manually programming the PCI configuration space would be
> helpful? I could put the card in another machine and read the PCI
> config space (when it's working) with 'lspci -xxx', and then write it on
> the cs20 with 'pcitweak' from XFree86. There is probably more that the
> BIOS does though...
I don't think it's needed; from the above the PCI side of things seems
to be set up fine as it is, and video chips need much more setup than
writing a block of information.
It seems fine though, especially because of this:
> Also, I just compiled-in matroxfb, and I get boot penguins.
If by that you mean you see the boot logo, then the card works fine,
doesn't it -- just not under X? Or do you see lots of them all over the
screen, i.e. no synchronization?
> I've tried all combinations of the kernel command-line parameters
> video=matrox:init:nobios. Also this post:
> http://www.directfb.org/mailinglists/directfb-dev/2002/03-2002/msg00042.html
> claims that matroxfb can initialize this card...
If I understand you correctly, the card is working fine, the problem is
only that X wants to see a ROM signature to be sure it's talking to the
right card. The ROM is disabled (see above), so what you probably need
to do is find certain option to tell X that it should skip that check.
That is assuming X doesn't really /depend/ on functions in the BIOS, but
if that is the case then the MGA driver in X would be x86 only or would
need a CPU emulator. Now /that/ would be crappy design. ;-).
Cheers,
Emile.
--
E-Advies / Emile van Bergen | emile@e-advies.info
tel. +31 (0)70 3906153 | http://www.e-advies.info
Reply to: