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

Re: 2.6.15-1-sparc64 issues on blade 100

On Fri, Feb 10, 2006 at 08:46:40PM -0800, Jurij Smakov wrote:
> On Wed, 8 Feb 2006, Luis F. Ortiz wrote:
> >	With regard to the video problems, you are welcome to try my fix to 
> >the problem. There were two problems I found, a missing flag 
> >(M64F_SDRAM_MAGIC_PLL) and a bad clock rate (230 instead of 235).   Try 
> >applying some variation of the following patch. This fix went to
> >2.6.16-rc1, but was partially overwritten by a subsequent patch.  
> >Hopefully the full fix will reappear shortly, and then the debian folks 
> >will pick it up.
> >
> >	If it does not fix your problem let me know; it means there is 
> >	likely something wrong with my setup as well, and I just don't know it.   
> >If it does help, let me know so I can try harder to get it in for 2.6.16 
> >final.
> Right, I've just checked and the code in 2.6.16-rc2 has the correct flags, 
> but frequency is still set to 230 instead of correct 235 (*sigh*). I'll 
> get a patch into svn. Updated kernels should be available from my site 
> tomorrow.

I just tried
(time stamp is 11 Feb 2006, 09:17), and there is still some flickering in the
console when text is scrolling by, and there are still red dots in X (and X
still uses a 60 Hz refresh rate while it should use 85).

I'm not sure if Louis' fix is in this kernel, but if it is, then apparently,
there is still something wrong. Louis: which open boot firmware are you using?
According to /proc/openprom/openprom/version, I'm still at OBP 4.0.45 2001/02/08
14:33, could this be an issue for the framebuffer code? If not, then is it
possible that my Ati chip is a slightly different revision than yours?

I haven't tested this kernel long enough to see if it is as unstable as my
custom 2.6.15.

I will now try to build a custom 2.6.16-rc2 (I want to try some bluetooth stuff,
but apparently, 2.6.16-rc2-sparc64 has bluetooth disabled), and I want to make
sure Louis' fix is in there.

Best regards,


Reply to: