Bug#342053: DirectFrameBuffer crashes on PPC systems if HW accelerated drivers are used
On Sat, Sep 23, 2006 at 12:45:10PM +0200, Attilio Fiandrotti wrote:
> looking at DFB's supported-hardware page
>
> http://www.directfb.org/index.php?path=Main%2FSupport%2FGraphics
>
> i can see some of those fb modules may allow DFB to run in hw
> accelerated mode, but for many of them no functionality tests on PPC
> hardware were ever peformed, so i guess disabling HW acceleration tout
> court for PPC was indeed the right choice for safeness.
> Speaking generically, i don't know how much is safe having DFB running
> in accelerated mode using fb module "X" on architecture "Y".
> An extensive set of tests to detect bad X,Y couples looks dificlut to be
> performed, so to be sure the end-user never runs in a bad X,Y situation,
> a safe choice would be disabling hw acceleration by defalut, for all
> architectures.
Understood.
> >>>>Sven, looking at the PNG you posted it looks like the trashed banner
> >>>>colours issue we experienced at extremadura is gone, does also the
> >>>>cursor is displayed correctly (to grab both screen and pointer at DFB's
> >>>>level, you can press the "PrtSc" key in the case your PPC has one) ?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>The pegasos uses a normal PC keyboard, so i should have this key, but in
> >>>any
> >>>case, indeed both these issues are gone, and the two new ones i
> >>>mentioned are
> >>>there (the list selection dissapearance thingy). Do you see that on x86
> >>>also ?
> >>
> >>Yes, i saw the vanished lines in your screenshots and i belive this may
> >>be #385026, which is GTKDFB 2.8.x related and affects all HW platforms.
> >>As Frans said, this is a quite annoying bug and i'll try to see if i can
> >>fix it in GTKDFB 2.8.20 with a small patch (but i'm not sure it's going
> >>to be an easy fix).
> >
> >
> >Is it fixed in 2.10.x ?
>
> Basing on my past tests with different GTK+ 2.10 versions, it is.
This would be a reason to go with gtk 2.10.x, those packages are built and
uploaded to experimental, right ? So we could do a second build using the 2.10
stuff ?
> >Not sure if we ever had a success with g-i on oldworld, so it is less
> >important, and my prep box has a sis and a matrox, but g-i is too big to
> >boot
> >on it. I do have a spare matox millenium i could plug in the pegasos, and
> >just
> >got a xgi volari v3xt. Will test with them. nvidia is evil and should be
> >boycotted anyway :)
>
> On my PReP 7043/140 box i experienced success in running unaccelerated
> DFB applications with a Matrox card some times ago, but i never managed
> to test GTKDFB applications.
The problem on PReP is getting it to load the huge g-i initrd, not really
running apps afterward, altough this would indicate there is a serious problem
with matroxfb maybe.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
Reply to: