Hello, Dale. On Sun, Aug 25, 2024 at 14:37:37 -0500, Dale wrote: > Alan Mackenzie wrote: > > Hello, Dale
> > On Sun, Aug 25, 2024 at 13:28:14 -0500, Dale wrote: > >> Alan Mackenzie wrote: > >>> Somehow I don't think that will work (which doesn't mean I won't try it). > >>> There is something in the motherboard which is throwing off the desired > >>> resolution by those extra 192 horizontal pixels, even in the BIOS. > >> Do you have x11-apps/xrandr installed? If you do, see what this says. > > I didn't, but I do now. After trying (and failing) to run it on the > > console, I tried in X-Windows (the display of which is miserably > > unstable at the moment). > >> xrandr --listmonitors > >> This is mine: > >> root@Gentoo-1 / # xrandr --listmonitors > >> Monitors: 3 > >> 0: +*DP-2 1920/698x1080/393+0+1080 DP-2 > >> 1: +DP-1 1920/698x1080/393+0+0 DP-1 > >> 2: +DP-7 1920/1150x1080/650+1920+1080 DP-7 > >> root@Gentoo-1 / # > > That's one tremendous monitor you've got on DP-7. :-) > > I've got just the one monitor. I got back: > > 0: +*HDMI-A-0 1920/521x1080/293+0+0 HDMI-A-0 > If I read that and my thinking is right, that is what it should be. I > don't completely understand everything that output is saying. But, I > technically have three monitors. I have two in front of me that have > different displays. Those are DP2 and DP-2. The third, DP-7, is my TV > that I watch. It goes to a splitter which goes to a TV in my bedroom > and one in the living room. I can cook, clean etc while watching TV. > DP-7 is to the right of DP-2 which may be why it shows something larger. > Some of this monitor stuff is a bit confusing. I won't disagree with you there. > >> DP-2 is my primary display and if you have only one monitor, should be > >> the only line for you but might be DP-1 instead. Micheal might can > >> explain this better, or even more correctly, but I think the important > >> part for this is where mine says +0+. I think, just think, if yours > >> says something like +192+ instead of 0, that might be a clue. If it > >> says 0 as it should, then this may be the wrong track to look down. > >> What I'm wondering, is the monitor set to show a blank, or black, > >> section on that side for some reason. This could very well not be the > >> case tho. If it shows correctly like mine does, then ignore this and > >> know that isn't causing the problem at least. > > No, I've got the +0+, too. > >> This is a odd problem. I don't think I ever saw this even during the > >> old CRT days. o_O > > I'm convinced this isn't a problem in Linux. It's something having got > > wedged in the motherboard's firmware, seeing as how the blank strip > > appears even when going into the BIOS. I suspect I'm going to have to > > reinitialise the CMOS ram, which I really don't want to do, though > > Michael doesn't think that's the problem. We'll see. > >> Dale > >> :-) :-) > Ahhhhh. If it does it in the BIOS, it's either a monitor or video card, > or mobo if video is built in, problem. If a monitor isn't right in the > BIOS screen, odds are it won't be when booted either. Can you install a > video card and test? If it works, mobo has a video driver problem. If > not, could be monitor or cables or something. > At least we know one thing it isn't. ;-) I got a shop to build this machine for me, and I'm confident they would have tested it. It was working fine when I got it. I'm 95% sure the problem happened when I tried out the drm.edid_firmware kernel parameter, in an attempt to get my video going. Actually, I'm less sure now, having looked at my notes from last Monday, the day I got then new box. I got the basics installed on Monday, and then (according to my notes) was trying to fix this damned video problem in the middle of the night, Monday night. That was surely before I started messing with kernel parameters. :-( I honestly don't think it's the hardware at fault. There are exactly 192 extra pixel rows shown in the output from twiddling the switches on the front of the monitor, and the display with a console is stable and moderately usable (in contrast to the X Windows display which goes blank several times a minute). 192 is 16 x 12, far too round a number to be happening through HW failure. Likewise, there are 36 too many extra pixel columns, also a very round number. Yet, all the time both the BIOS firmware and the Linux framebuffer think they're working at 1920x1080. My bet is a bug in the BIOS firmware. Anyhow, I opened a support request to MSI on Friday, so I hope they'll come back to me some time early this week. > Dale > :-) :-) -- Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).
