Re: direct rendering on 1280x854 TiBook

2002-09-29 Thread Michel Dänzer
On Mon, 2002-09-30 at 02:54, christophe barbé wrote: > On Sat, Sep 28, 2002 at 12:46:28AM +0200, Michel D?nzer wrote: > > I have /etc/modutils/drm with > > > > pre-install radeon modprobe agpgart > > > > for that. > > Thanks. It did it, I have now accelarated 3D with not-slowed down 2D. In fac

Re: direct rendering on 1280x854 TiBook

2002-09-29 Thread christophe =?unknown-8bit?q?barb=E9?=
On Sat, Sep 28, 2002 at 12:46:28AM +0200, Michel D?nzer wrote: > I have /etc/modutils/drm with > > pre-install radeon modprobe agpgart > > for that. Thanks. It did it, I have now accelarated 3D with not-slowed down 2D. Christophe -- Christophe Barbé <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> GnuPG FingerPrint: E

Re: direct rendering on 1280x854 TiBook

2002-09-27 Thread Michel Dänzer
On Sam, 2002-09-28 at 00:33, christophe barbé wrote: > On Fri, Sep 27, 2002 at 05:54:57PM -0400, christophe barbe wrote: > > It works significantly faster for opengl based display. But doing my > > test with xscreensaver I can see that a few 2d screensaver are slower. > > It looks like they are no

Re: direct rendering on 1280x854 TiBook

2002-09-27 Thread christophe =?unknown-8bit?q?barb=E9?=
On Fri, Sep 27, 2002 at 05:54:57PM -0400, christophe barbe wrote: > It works significantly faster for opengl based display. But doing my > test with xscreensaver I can see that a few 2d screensaver are slower. > It looks like they are no more double-bufferized or the image chaged is > not in sync.

Re: direct rendering on 1280x854 TiBook

2002-09-27 Thread christophe =?unknown-8bit?q?barb=E9?=
It works significantly faster for opengl based display. But doing my test with xscreensaver I can see that a few 2d screensaver are slower. It looks like they are no more double-bufferized or the image chaged is not in sync. For example "Spotlight" is slower and you can see the spot appers in a few

Re: direct rendering on 1280x854 TiBook

2002-09-27 Thread christophe =?unknown-8bit?q?barb=E9?=
On Fri, Sep 27, 2002 at 10:24:40PM +0200, Michel D?nzer wrote: > On Fre, 2002-09-27 at 21:42, christophe barb? wrote: > > > >(EE) RADEON(0): [dri] RADEONDRIScreenInit failed because of a version > > mismatch. > >[dri] radeon.o kernel module version is 1.1.1 but version 1.2.1 or newer > >

Re: direct rendering on 1280x854 TiBook

2002-09-27 Thread Michel Dänzer
On Fre, 2002-09-27 at 21:42, christophe barbé wrote: > >(EE) RADEON(0): [dri] RADEONDRIScreenInit failed because of a version > mismatch. >[dri] radeon.o kernel module version is 1.1.1 but version 1.2.1 or newer > is needed. >[dri] Disabling DRI. > > I have a one week old benh kerne

direct rendering on 1280x854 TiBook

2002-09-27 Thread christophe =?unknown-8bit?q?barb=E9?=
After reading the previous thread I am wondering if my X config is correct. With glxinfo, I see: name of display: :0.0 display: :0 screen: 0 direct rendering: No In my XFree log I see: (II) RADEON(0): [drm] created "radeon" driver at busid "PCI:0:16:0" (II) RADEON(0): [drm] added