[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Xclaim VR pro not supported?



On Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 10:51:23AM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Apr 2001, Andy Wettstein wrote:
> > I'm trying to set up a blue g3 that has an xclaimvrpro reported like
> > this from the kernel:
> > Using unsupported 1024x768 ATY,XCLAIMVRPro at 81000000, depth=8,pitch=1024
> > Console: switching to colour frame buffer device 128x48
> > fb0: Open Firmware frame buffer device on /pci@80000000/pci-bridge@d/ATY,XCLAIMVRPro@2
> > 
> > I had to specify video=ofonly to get the thing to even boot.  Now when
> > I'm trying to set up X windows the best I can do is 8 bit color using
> > the framebuffer.  I tried to use the ati driver, and it looks like it
> > works, my windowmanager starts and all (i can tell by using ssh), 
> > but all I get is a black screen.  
> 
> What is the output from atyfb when not specifying video=ofonly? If all you get
> is a black screen, look in the logfiles.

I'll send this monday when I have physical access to the machine.

> 
> What does lspci -vv say?

01:02.0 VGA compatible controller: ATI Technologies Inc 3D Rage Pro (rev 5c) (prog-if 00 [VGA])
   Subsystem: ATI Technologies Inc: Unknown device 0000
   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: 16 (2000ns min), cache line size 08
   Interrupt: pin A routed to IRQ 23
   Region 0: Memory at 81000000 (32-bit, prefetchable)
   Region 1: I/O ports at 1400 [disabled]
   Region 2: Memory at 80881000 (32-bit, non-prefetchable)
   Expansion ROM at 808c0000 [disabled]
> 
> Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
> 
> 						Geert
> 
> --
> Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org
> 
> In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
> when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
> 							    -- Linus Torvalds
> 



Reply to: