On Fri, May 28, 2004 at 09:44:30AM -0400, Kyle McMartin wrote: > On Fri, May 28, 2004 at 03:43:23AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: > > I'm not surprised, as nothing has been done to fix it. > > > Nod. > > A "fix" for this, is that I just go and rebuild X without the > 450_ia64_ati_avoid_cpio.diff patch, which > really isn't too big of a deal and I can live with. This obviously isn't > a solution, since it probably breaks things for other people. Yeah, patch #450 is in there by explicit request. Using CPIO can cause machine checks on at least some IA64 boxen, so it's really not a good idea for the general case. > > The only fix for this bug is for some new code to be written for the > > atimisc driver. > > Interesting. If I have some free time, I will take a look into writing > the code. Hopefully it is not the sort that requires ATI documentation > to fix. In many cases, there isn't much difference between the driver's MMIO code and the CPIO code. However, where there are differences, they might be exactly the type that requires docs. However, I do encourage you to look into this; I'll be quite interested to see what you find out, and if I can help with some general X server questions, I'd be happy to. I'm probably not of much use when it comes to atimisc driver internals, though. Thanks very much for looking into this. -- G. Branden Robinson | The only way to get rid of a Debian GNU/Linux | temptation is to yield to it. branden@debian.org | -- Oscar Wilde http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature