Re: Help with X on iBook?
Hi,
I'd know a way... the same way that the fbdev drivers use.
cat /proc/cpuinfo | grep machine to see what i mean
FBDev has an advantage on Xfree for this, it runs inside the kernel and
therefore knows what type of machine it's running on.
Hope this helps
Michel Dänzer wrote:
>
> Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> >
> > >On Mon, 26 Feb 2001, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> > >> I just had an interesting idea: The flat panel code could never
> > >determine the
> > >> panel dimensions because our machines don't have a BIOS. So I
> > specified them
> > >> with
> > >>
> > >> Option "PanelWidth" "1024"
> > >> Option "PanelHeight" "768"
> > >>
> > >> and it works without any of the options I have mentioned here a thousand
> > >> times! (iBook users will have to use 800 and 600 of course) This kind of
> > >> enables mode switching, but everyone should be aware that *this may
> > >> damage your panel* . You've been warned.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Now I just wonder if we could detect the panel dimensions somehow...
> > >
> > >From the OF device tree? And return it to userspace using a new fbdev
> > ioctl()?
> >
> > Unfortunately, the OF ATI drivers won't give you anything useful in the
> > device-tree (not even the PLL & clock values). There should probably be a
> > way to probe the panel type, but I'm not too sure how. For the PLL &
> > clock values, the only solution I have (suggested by ATI) would be to
> > build a big table indexed by the OF name of the card that contains the
> > ref clocks (the divider can be read from the registers) and eventually
> > the min/max PLL values. A table based on the machine model can probably
> > be used for the LCD size (but beware that wallstreet exist in both
> > 800x600 passive matrix and 1024x768 active & passive matrix). I beleive
> > new LVDS displays can be probed but I don't know how.
> >
> > You can't even rely on the resolution returned by the OF driver as, at
> > least on my pismo, it's able to use a scaled mode for booting if asked to
> > do so by the nvram settings.
>
> *sigh*
>
> > I tried the above options and indeed, it works. However, if I then allow
> > X to use 800x600 (and other resolutions like 640x480), the scaler doesn't
> > seem to be properly configured. It's readable, but the display is
> > somewhat clipped and have a vertical band at the 3/4 of the screen that
> > wraps part of it. (Difficult to explain what I see... doesn't look far
> > from beeing correct however).
>
> Yup, seen that too - it used to be like this in 32 bit but better in 16 bit.
> :(
--
/Bastien Nocera
http://hadess.net
Reply to: