On Fri, Oct 18, 2002 at 07:37:03PM -0400, Mike A. Harris wrote: > I can say 100% that this patch both for Radeon and Rage 128 has > solved the lockup problems on over 100 users of Red Hat Linux > (after that I stopped keeping track), and has caused no negative > effects. I'm not sure if it is the correct solution to the > problem, or the best solution, but it definitely was _a_ > solution, and one certainly acceptable to me as it solves lockups > that occured for numerous users for 9 months+. If the CVS code > has a solution in it that makes the patch Charl created > unnecessary, that's even better. > > If the CVS code does lockup however, then I think it makes sense > to put Charl's patch back in. Thanks for the detailed elaboration Mike. I did test the CVS code on a machine that was known to suffer from the lockup problem previously, and Marc's changes FIX this problem in a much more elegant fashion. I repeat: with current CVS and WITHOUT our explicit call to xf86EnableBusMaster (or whatever) in RADEONEnterVT(), the CVS code does NOT lockup at VT switch. You'll obviously test this as well, I'm just adding another data-point. Thanks, Charl PS As things have been explained in this thread, it seems that X should not make any assumptions about hardware state when returning from VT. Would this mean that all Radeon (e.g.) hardware setup will have to be re-performed (e.g. re-installing the GPU microcode, performing all register outputs for setting up AGP, etc) after switching back from VT? If this is the case, that would be wonderful, as suspend/resume from disc/ram would just work without any ugly patches. -- charl p. botha http://cpbotha.net/ http://visualisation.tudelft.nl/ _______________________________________________ Xpert mailing list Xpert@xxxxxxxxxxx http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xpert