[HEADS UP] Xorg 7.5 merge comming tomorrow.

[Robert Noland]

Peter Jeremy wrote:
> [Cc list reduced to x11- only]
> 
> On 2010-Apr-30 20:35:23 +0200, Martin Wilke <miwi at FreeBSD.org> wrote:
>> Now the facts. Xorg 7.5 is completely finished last issues
>> were fixed by fluffy@, and the exp-run was also fine, I expect
>> the merge of xorg 7.5 tomorrow evening UTC. I think the KDE
> 
> I have upgraded my dual-screen testbox with a up-to-date 8-stable and
> ports tree and built xorg from scratch and (as I feared), it's still
> broken: There is no change from the problems I reported regarding the
> test release in mid-March.
> 
> To re-iterate, on a RV380 with dual screens laid out side-by-side,
> moving a window into the RH screen causes corruption of both screens.
> The RH screen updating is also far slower then the LH screen (which
> seems fairly normal).

Is all of this configured using randr?  With randr, both displays are a 
single framebuffer, so from a performance perspective, there is no 
difference in the displays.  The other part of your issue sounds like 
possibly an exceeded texture limit, or mismapping somehow.

> I've done some more experimenting with "interesting" results:
> 
> With the screens vertically stacked, the top ~1/4 of the bottom screen
> behaves normally, but anything below that is corrupted (looks like
> noise).  When I turn off RenderAccel, the corruption turns into
> alternating black and white horizontal bands about 5px high.  In either
> case, the update rate appears normal.

You are using EXA, right?

robert.

> If I set NoAccel, I get
> (EE) RADEON(0): Acceleration required for rotation
> (which is surprising since I haven't specified acceleration anywhere).
> 
> I had a quick look into the memory allocation since the reported
> mappings and sizes overlapped - but it turns out this is just bugs
> in the printf()'s code.
> 
> At this stage, I am stymied.  I'm not even sure where to start
> looking at the code.
>