[00:04] I'm trying the reporter's cpuburn trick; still no flicker here. [00:14] got your backlight maxed? maybe if you dim it all the way? [00:14] * Sarvatt gets flicker at the lowest brightness setting but its a hardware problem [00:16] The pcert tag is for... hardware that we want to platform-certify? [01:29] kewl: http://homepage.mac.com/arekkusu/bugs/GLInfo.html [01:33] That's moderately fun :) [03:01] bryceh: I see we've both decided that bug #541492 is a candidate for kms blacklisting at the same time :) [03:01] Launchpad bug 541492 in xserver-xorg-video-intel "MASTER: [i845] GPU lockup (apport-crash) (Should KMS be blacklisted?)" [Unknown,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/541492 [03:01] RAOF, heh [03:02] RAOF I already sent i830 off to be blacklisted [03:02] RAOF, any other chipsets we should think about blacklisting? [03:02] there was an ati card, but it ended up the kernel team got some patches to solve it [03:03] I'm still going through the list. I think we should quirk off acceleration for some nvidia cards, and I've got a patch for that, but we can't quirk off kms for them :) [03:04] Oh, while I think of it - do you have any tips for how to decypher fedora's kernel packaging? I wanted to see if they had any secret sauce for making macbook pros work, but I'm struggling with viewcvs. [03:06] link? [03:07] http://cvs.fedoraproject.org/viewvc/F-12/kernel/ ? [03:07] I don't have particular tricks, usually I just thumb through the patches and cherrypick [03:07] mm, slow webpage [03:08] Nouveau's a bit difficult for that in Fedora, since they basically take the diff between 2.6.33 and nouveau/linux-2.6 and apply it. [03:09] ah, ick [03:10] yeah in that case you'll have to go through the nouveau git tree or something [03:11] And hope that it's not one of the changes that is in fedora but not the nouveau git tree :/ [03:28] tjaalton, I've moved the versions page up a level (and discarded the historical data): http://www2.bryceharrington.org:8080/X/Reports/ubuntu-x-swat/versions-current.html [03:44] i830. never heard of that one [03:45] Yeah. It's rare, and that doesnt' help. [03:45] the number suggests it's pretty old i guess [03:46] i wonder how many people are still using it [03:46] and on what type of device [03:46] At least some on at least one tablet, and it doesn't drive their lvds because the encoder(?) isn't supported at all. [03:50] don't tablets come with their own operating systems? [03:50] Tablet laptops, like the lenovo x300 [03:51] Man, rev 02 Intel hardware is a rich source of hardware bugs. [04:00] Why is drm not even *attempting* to load in bug #552481 ? [04:00] Launchpad bug 552481 in xserver-xorg-video-intel "[i845g] Login screen doesn't appear" [High,Incomplete] https://launchpad.net/bugs/552481 [04:32] RAOF, excluding proprietary drivers, we are at a point where we have fewer bugs in our workqueue than when we started: [04:32] http://www2.bryceharrington.org:8080/X/Reports/ubuntu-x-swat/totals-lucid-workqueue.svg [04:32] That's a *nice* looking curve at the end [04:33] bryceh: did you drop the hunk in drmmode_xf86crtc_resize on purpose in the intel 101-copy-fb.patch [04:33] ? [04:33] http://cvs.fedoraproject.org/viewvc/F-12/xorg-x11-drv-intel/copy-fb.patch?revision=1.9&content-type=text/plain&view=co [04:34] @@ -1373,6 +1382,8 @@ drmmode_xf86crtc_resize (ScrnInfoPtr scr -- that hunk is missing in ours [04:35] Sarvatt, wow that's an old one [04:35] i'm looking at the newest one relevant to 2.9.1 [04:35] the formatting of our patch doesn't match what I generally create [04:35] nor does it look like an upstream patch [04:36] iirc someone gave it to me to include, but I don't remember who. alberto maybe [04:36] i figured you applied it by hand and did a manual diff or something, must not have been you :) [04:36] mmm, maybe it's one of the ones we got from moblin [04:36] no, when I do patches they don't have the line of ======'s there at the top [04:36] perhaps the fedora patch is an updated version [04:37] they always had that hunk and fedora doesn't have any changes in the time frame of that diff [04:38] wait, are you sure we're missing that? [04:38] the chunk is [04:39] + scrn->canDoBGNoneRoot = TRUE; [04:39] + [04:39] which we do have in our patch [04:39] we have + pScrn->canDoBGNoneRoot = TRUE; in another area [04:40] I assume it's fine [04:41] RAOF, yeah been busting hump getting bug reports cleared out... a lot I'm just reassigning to the kernel, some I'm terminating with prejudice, others sending upstream [04:42] I've gotten -ati and xserver under control [04:42] -intel's going in the right direction but needs more attention [04:46] It looks like we'll want to kms-blacklist 845 & 855, which should resolve quite a number. [04:47] yeah I didn't get to i855 but noticed there's a bunch of bug reports there [04:49] I'm testing my 865 machine and I got the video into a mode the won't display. How can I reset the resolution via ssh? [04:49] DISPLAY=:0 xrandr --output $WHATEVER --mode $SOMETHINGSAFE [04:50] * ScottK tries [04:50] or sometimes just DISPLAY=:0 xrandr --auto [04:50] * ScottK tries that first [04:51] That'll be a good one to squirrel away. [04:53] that and 'stty sane' :-) [04:55] Hm. Taking out that cheese has made it clear how hungry I am. Luncheon! [04:55] and Dinner for me! [04:57] DISPLAY=:0 xrandr --output VGA1 --mode 2048x1536 FTW! Thanks bryceh. [04:58] Again these people with huge displays driven over VGA /:? [04:59] RAOF: That was the default after I upgraded. [05:00] I'm not going to leave it that way. [05:28] bryceh: Kwin desktop effects at 1400x1050 on 865G! [05:29] Definitely better than Karmic. [05:59] bryceh: *all* of the batchbuffer no space left on device bugs i can find that are happening right after startup have multiple displays and drmmode_xf86crtc_resize is called in that case, i'm not sure if its screwing up there because we are missing that hunk but it seems suspicious [05:59] (plus I cant find any non ubuntu reports of it happening upstream) [06:16] Sarvatt: Hm. Could this perhaps *also* be related to the “plymouth, nouveau, and more than one screen” hang we've got? [06:17] * RAOF will be back shortly, after checking this kernel build [06:23] Good. That patch works as expected. [06:33] bryceh: ok thanks, updated my setup here [06:51] i think theres just something wrong in general with the bgnr stuff with multiple displays, looks like its happening in fedora too and we dont see it on radeon/nouveau because it doesn't work if theres multiple displays :) [06:51] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=386700 [06:55] the failed to submit batchbuffer no space error always happens right after a (II) intel(0): Allocate new frame buffer event in Xorg.0.log in both ubuntu and fedora, no reports elsewhere [06:56] (with multiple monitors) [06:57] So, what happens if we don't put plymouth on any secondary monitors? [07:00] need to hook up another monitor and try to reproduce it so i can mess around in drmmode_xf86crtc_resize to see where its failing [07:00] This is the one big failing of the x200s: it's got a stupid, useless VGA output instead of something useful. [07:01] Sarvatt, ok on the batchbuffer no space bug, keep investigating and let me know if you find something definitive; sounds like a promising lead [07:01] Sarvatt, might be worth making a ppa with redhat's patch instead of ours for folks to test; I can examine it more closely next week if it proves to make a difference [07:02] i dont think the nouveau thing is related btw, that seems to be a lockup in TTM when theres multiple monitors and it just waits forever somewhere, and its exacerbated by alot of <=nv40 cards always saying they have a tv connected which fedora forces off by default [07:02] bryceh: it happens on fedora too [07:02] just fedora and us [07:03] well, that's like 95% of the market between the two ;-) [07:03] Do we have any reports of -ati disliking plymouth + dual-head? [07:03] no because it doesnt copy the fb in dual head [07:03] only intel does that [07:03] RAOF, not that I've seen [07:04] first place i looked was drmmode_display.c in both radeon and nouveau, they have the copyfb stuff upstream already [07:04] Sarvatt, or maybe a ppa with that patch dropped [07:05] yeah thats what i'm thinking, ask them to test with it dropped at worst case (even though that sucks) [07:06] its the ones with Failed to submit batchbuffer: No space left on device in the xorg log, or [drm:i915_gem_execbuffer] *ERROR* Failed to pin buffer with a -28 return [07:15] we need a Ubuntu Bug Triage drinking game [07:16] Everytime vga16fb messes things up you take a shot? [07:16] and every mention of bug #1 [07:16] https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bug/1 (Timeout) [07:17] or "total show stopper" [07:17] No! “I see this behaviour too, on $TOTALLY_DIFFERENT_HARDWARE” [07:18] s/behaviour/bug/ [07:21] ok going to upload an intel with no 101-copy-fb.patch and ask the 10 or so bugs I see from a quick search to test :) if anything disabling it if theres >1 monitor shouldn't be hard, drmmode_display.c is pretty much duplicated between the 3 drivers and we can just do it how nouveau does (besides the uxa specific stuff) [07:23] I'm not sure that doing it how nouveau does it is a wonderful idea; copy it too well and you'll make plymouth hang with >1 monitor :) [07:24] that happening on NV50+ too? [07:25] Yes. [07:28] i think thats a nouveau specific problem though, seems to be hung looping a gem ioctl and getting stuck in ttm_bo_wait [07:30] first thing i looked at was http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commit;h=f0fbe3eb5f65fe5948219f4ceac68f8a665b1fc6 but we have that [07:30] thats where its getting stuck though [07:32] Yeah. I'm pretty sure that we've got the interesting bugfixes from nouveau/linux-2.6. [07:32] something tells me its a problem fixed in the api bump :) [07:33] I seem to remember having the same problem with xorg-edgers, though. [07:33] oh one other thing with >1 head systems [07:34] I feel like a dunce for not mentioning it already since it's >exactly< what I've been fiddling with all afternoon [07:35] watch for cases that are: a) multihead with total width > 2048; and b) running compiz; and c) older hardware with max texture size = 2048 [07:35] symptoms include black screen, strange corruption on right side of monitor, freezes, or other random behavior [07:35] regression from karmic [07:36] see bug #428769 [07:36] Launchpad bug 428769 in xserver-xorg-video-intel "compiz starts with a blank screen on a 2048x1152 monitor due to hw limit with textures > 2048" [Unknown,Fix released] https://launchpad.net/bugs/428769 [07:36] in karmic, there was a wrapper script to compiz that checked the max texture size and refused to run [07:36] in lucid, they got rid of the wrapper in favor of doing the checks in the compiz binary, but it seems something is still not quite right [07:37] bug #555641 is the X.org side of things, basically that it's a hardware limit and compiz shouldn't run in this case [07:37] Launchpad bug 555641 in xorg-server "MASTER: max texture size prevents compiz from running" [Wishlist,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/555641 [07:38] see also http://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=27530 where alex confirms as much [07:38] Freedesktop bug 27530 in Driver/Radeon "[RV370] Portion of second monitor unusable" [Normal,Resolved: notabug] [07:40] bryceh: That's a slightly different bug though, isn't it? I'm fairly sure multihead with *>* 2048 width works by falling back to metacity (I've seen this confimed in lucid bug reports). [07:41] The problem in that bug is with a screen resolution exactly *equal* to the max texture size. [07:41] RAOF, it's supposed to do that, but I've run through several bug reports now where it clearly did not happen [07:41] Which is significantly less common, I'd hope. [07:42] well, see #556631 as another example, where it's >2048 [07:45] yeah its 1 pixel off it seems bryceh, 2047 works 2048 doesn't so theres something odd going on [07:45] 2048 = compiz starts fine but you get a black screen, 2047 works from the bugs i've read over the past few months [07:46] 2049 would just fall back to metacity right [07:46] Sarvatt: Bug #556631 does seem to be a counter example there. [07:46] Launchpad bug 556631 in xserver-xorg-video-ati "Portion of second monitor unusable" [Medium,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/556631 [07:46] Albiet an -ati counterexample, rather than an -intel one. [07:47] I mean we don't have any compiz logs, so don't know exactly whats going on [07:47] the reporter could have mindlessly overridden compiz doing checking (if that's still possible to do) for all we know [07:48] Yeah. I just thought of that. [07:49] could be an easy fix in the == 2048 case though: https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/lucid/+source/compiz/+bug/428769/comments/17 [07:49] Launchpad bug 428769 in xserver-xorg-video-intel "compiz starts with a blank screen on a 2048x1152 monitor due to hw limit with textures > 2048" [Unknown,Fix released] [07:49] Right. A >= rather than > on the compiz check. [07:54] sheesh, how did i not notice that, i've known about this problem since december :D [07:55] ah nevermind thats just the fix for == which *should* work, i need sleep [07:56] heh, you saying I'm not alone in being a dunce? [07:57] anyway, I've set up both bugs to get top priority from the compiz folks so hopefully they'll get it sorted [07:57] meanwhile if you guys see more blank screen on boot bugs where they're running compiz on dual head with small max texture sizes, dupe 'em up [07:59] heya mvo [08:02] i was figuring it was one of these other ancient patches in here extending the texture 1 pixel in some direction (like 015_draw_dock_shadows_on_desktop.patch maybe?) but couldn't work it out [08:03] hey bryceh [08:07] mvo, we were just discussing an issue we've seen reported a bunch, that I think may be a compiz regression - https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/lucid/+source/compiz/+bug/428769 [08:07] Launchpad bug 428769 in xserver-xorg-video-intel "compiz starts with a blank screen on a 2048x1152 monitor due to hw limit with textures > 2048" [Unknown,Fix released] [08:10] bryceh: so compiz is not correctly detecting that it can not work in this environment? [08:11] mvo, right [08:12] bryceh: that is very possible, the code that detects this has changed in lucid [08:13] bryceh: aha, I see put that in comment #15 already [08:14] bryceh: I can do a upload with a fix as described in #17 [08:14] bryceh: I don't have the HW to test it though [08:14] bryceh: this particular error [08:14] but it does make perfect sense [08:14] (the fix) [08:15] mvo, great [08:18] if LP lets me that is [08:18] heh [08:18] mvo, probably will be blocked until freeze is lifted tomorrow [08:27] bryceh: while I have you here, you set bug #540519 to confirmed and targeted it. do you have more inside into it? [08:27] Launchpad bug 540519 in software-center "software-center crashed with SIGSEGV in webkit_web_view_execute_script()" [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/540519 [08:28] bryceh: it looks like a webkit issue to me [08:29] bryceh: or do you have a recipe to reproduce? [08:29] * bryceh ponders [08:30] I got the crash myself, and this was suggested as the dupe of it [08:30] mvo, I think I was trying to look at screenshots of games [08:31] ok, so just clicking on the "enlarge" screenshot picture? [08:33] bryceh: I upload your suggested fix now. one thing that is odd is that the reporter claims it works with the jaunty version of X/compiz on the same HW [08:35] mvo, I think it might have been on a game where the screenshot didn't show. I don't really remember the precise situation, eventually software-center locked up and I think I had to kill it, so got the crash report later [08:44] * mvo nods [09:19] do other intel lucid users have this recent slowdown bug #555595 ? [09:19] Launchpad bug 555595 in linux "Intel graphics performance regression in recent lucid kernel update (was: Firefox Slows Down Compiz)" [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/555595 [10:34] Mirv, no [11:34] bryceh: amd64 or not? [11:35] it seems the problem was not there in at least -16 which I managed to get now installed. [11:35] the bug reporter and me are using amd64 === BUGabundo is now known as BUGabundo_lunch === BUGabundo_lunch is now known as BUGa_vacations [18:06] haha http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/969355 [18:24] * BUGa_vacations reads [18:25] thanks bryceh [18:25] I needed that [18:28] MAUAUUAU [18:28] bryceh: look at the date [18:30] BUGa_vacations, sure or read the rest of the thread http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/969355 [20:16] bloody hell, waltop/wacom merge works [20:45] bryceh, do i take you reposonses to the radeon PLL thread to mean that you think we need it regardless of its hugeness? [20:52] apw, yes-ish. If anyone has specific concerns about possible regressions though, I'd favor further testing first. I skimmed through the code briefly and didn't see anything that frightened me [20:52] but devil's in the details of course [20:52] bryceh, there are kernels with the patches applied in that bug, so we could get people to test that [20:52] apw, my experience has been that Alex is a pretty careful coder, and is good about recommending only patches that are safe [20:52] bryceh, yeah as alwasy, a difficult choice [20:53] thats good to know [20:53] (one of the reasons I like working on -ati so much more than -intel) [20:53] bryceh, :) thats something ... [20:54] its works pretty well on my only ati box the current stuff, but i did see some flickering there ... perhaps i need to test [20:59] apw, dunno if you saw them but we've bumped a bunch of pll quirk bugs over to linux the past couple weeks [20:59] if you do a search for 'needs_pll_quirk' I think you'll turn them up. At least half a dozen, maybe more. [21:00] my guess/assumption is they'd all be fixable after this patch is in place [21:01] apw, so with the firmware update on my MT tablet, it looks like I'm going to need to reinstall windows 7 in order to install the firmware. Urgh. [21:01] I'll give it a go next week [23:46] You know compiz was broken the same way (black screen) in the Karmic release? --> in karmic, there was a wrapper script to compiz that checked the max texture size and refused to run [23:51] merriam: Which bug is this? The == 2048 width bug, or a > 2048 dimension bug? [23:58] ==