Nouveau - Nov 2011 - nouveau on Linux/sparc64 -- almost!

Hey all,

First off, I'd like to say many thanks to the nouveau developers!

I've got a Sun Ultra 10 running Debian 6 (testing branch) with an 
onboard ATI card and a PCI GeForceMX 4000. So far X works fine on the 
ATI card, but I noticed that the DRM driver for the GF4 has a few 
unaligned accesses in it (see log). I can actually start X using that 
card, but all I get is a black screen -- though the cursor works and I 
can move it around! It seems like it is very close to working. 
Unfortunately, I can't seem kill X in a way that preserves the graphical 
output of either the gfx chip.

Any ideas where to begin hacking at this problem? Any suggestions or 
known issues on RISC systems? I have an x86 box running Debian 6 with a 
Geforce4 MX (AGP) as well, so hopefully I can test fixes that will work 
on both x86 and sparc64.




-------------- next part --------------
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: gf_mx4000_sparc64.txt
URL:
<http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/nouveau/attachments/20111122/2d444126/attachment.txt>

On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 8:10 PM, Patrick Baggett
<baggett.patrick at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hey all,
>
> First off, I'd like to say many thanks to the nouveau developers!
>
> I've got a Sun Ultra 10 running Debian 6 (testing branch) with an
onboard
> ATI card and a PCI GeForceMX 4000. So far X works fine on the ATI card, but
> I noticed that the DRM driver for the GF4 has a few unaligned accesses in
it
> (see log). I can actually start X using that card, but all I get is a black
> screen -- though the cursor works and I can move it around! It seems like
it
> is very close to working. Unfortunately, I can't seem kill X in a way
that
> preserves the graphical output of either the gfx chip.
>
> Any ideas where to begin hacking at this problem? Any suggestions or known
> issues on RISC systems? I have an x86 box running Debian 6 with a Geforce4
> MX (AGP) as well, so hopefully I can test fixes that will work on both x86
> and sparc64.
Are unaligned accesses actually errors on Sparc or just trapped and
emulated and therefore slow? If you can start X, does that mean fbcon
works?