From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <2b17d6d1429b966eeb1d0f802479da58@granite.cias.osakafu-u.ac.jp> To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu Subject: Re: [9fans] GeForece4 MX (Inno3D Tornedo) From: okamoto@granite.cias.osakafu-u.ac.jp In-Reply-To: <2479282393cac7dbc85ee9dc2b22d590@plan9.bell-labs.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="upas-xyltnvzlwxmsduomjyerjgaajn" Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 09:50:12 +0900 Topicbox-Message-UUID: 908c1fcc-eacb-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --upas-xyltnvzlwxmsduomjyerjgaajn Content-Disposition: inline Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I have two kinds of Nvidia cards, one is GeForece2 MX200(32MB), and the other is GeForece4 MX(64MB), the latter of which was the card I reported problem and solution. For Geforece2 cards we have no problem up to 1600x1200x32 to run with your new driver, which recognizes the nvidia cards automatically. In the case of our GeForce4 card, I think the problem was caused by the bug of the card itself. Kenji --upas-xyltnvzlwxmsduomjyerjgaajn Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Disposition: inline Received: from granite.cias.osakafu-u.ac.jp ([192.168.1.3]) by diabase; Wed Apr 16 00:24:56 JST 2003 Received: from elmo.cias.osakafu-u.ac.jp (elmo.cias.osakafu-u.ac.jp [157.16.103.2]) by granite.cias.osakafu-u.ac.jp (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id AAA00978 for ; Wed, 16 Apr 2003 00:24:08 +0900 Received: from mail.cse.psu.edu (psuvax1.cse.psu.edu [130.203.4.6]) by elmo.cias.osakafu-u.ac.jp (8.9.3p2/3.7W-03041212) with ESMTP id AAA15721 for ; Wed, 16 Apr 2003 00:24:22 +0900 (JST) Received: from psuvax1.cse.psu.edu (psuvax1.cse.psu.edu [130.203.20.6]) by mail.cse.psu.edu (CSE Mail Server) with ESMTP id 6484B19B80; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 11:24:09 -0400 (EDT) Delivered-To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu Received: from plan9.cs.bell-labs.com (ampl.com [204.178.31.2]) by mail.cse.psu.edu (CSE Mail Server) with ESMTP id E593B19A1C for <9fans@cse.psu.edu>; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 11:23:30 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <2479282393cac7dbc85ee9dc2b22d590@plan9.bell-labs.com> From: "Russ Cox" To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu Subject: Re: [9fans] GeForece4 MX (Inno3D Tornedo) In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: 9fans-admin@cse.psu.edu Errors-To: 9fans-admin@cse.psu.edu X-BeenThere: 9fans@cse.psu.edu X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.11 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu List-Id: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans.cse.psu.edu> List-Archive: Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2003 11:23:28 -0400 Do you have a bigger monitor? I'd be interested to know if the higher resolution modes work at all for you. I tried a 0x0181 card recently and just could not get it to do anything >= 1280x1024. I made the clock frequency change, but that wasn't enough. It was as though the "I am a mode < 1280 pixels wide" bit (0x04 in CRT 0x1A) was set, even though it was very clearly not set: I could run in 1268x1024 just fine, but pushing it up to 1280 broke things. Modes like 1600x1200 just gave completely blank screens. I traced through the VGA BIOS initializing the card and still couldn't figure out what was going on in the 1280x1024 case. The BIOS did not give 1600x1200 as a mode option, though 1400x1050 was (and didn't shed any light on the subject). This was all in digital mode. Finally I rewrote the driver to be almost exactly like the XFree86 driver (even closer than the current one) and then nothing worked, presumably because of some bugs I introduced but didn't track down. At this point a week had gone by, and I gave up, threw out all the code I'd changed, and just used VMware. So much for Nvidia's great backwards compatibility. Sigh. --upas-xyltnvzlwxmsduomjyerjgaajn--