| Summary: | RandR 1.2 driver interface conversion of two colour cursors to ARGB broken on big endian platforms | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | xorg | Reporter: | Michel Dänzer <michel> | ||||||||||
| Component: | Server/DDX/Xorg | Assignee: | Xorg Project Team <xorg-team> | ||||||||||
| Status: | RESOLVED FIXED | QA Contact: | Xorg Project Team <xorg-team> | ||||||||||
| Severity: | normal | ||||||||||||
| Priority: | medium | CC: | airlied, alexdeucher, alexm, brice.goglin, bugzi11.fdo.tormod, chrschmitt, hvr, lu_zero, magnade, mattst88, nicholas | ||||||||||
| Version: | git | ||||||||||||
| Hardware: | Other | ||||||||||||
| OS: | All | ||||||||||||
| Whiteboard: | |||||||||||||
| i915 platform: | i915 features: | ||||||||||||
| Bug Depends on: | |||||||||||||
| Bug Blocks: | 8888, 10101 | ||||||||||||
| Attachments: |
|
||||||||||||
|
Description
Michel Dänzer
2007-08-01 10:25:00 UTC
Created attachment 11220 [details] [review] Possible fix This patch (and not setting HARDWARE_CURSOR_BIT_ORDER_MSBFIRST on big endian platforms) fixes it for me with the radeon driver and doesn't break intel. Not sure it's the correct fix or even a good one though, opinions? On second thought, this probably breaks radeon on little endian platforms... Created attachment 11430 [details] [review] Minimally invasive workaround for big endian platforms This patch has no effect on little endian platforms but allows the radeon driver to work on big endian platforms. Does this look acceptable for 1.4? Created attachment 11431 [details] [review] Added comment This patch did not work on my G4. Cursor is still bugged. (In reply to comment #5) > This patch did not work on my G4. Cursor is still bugged. You also need to disable the setting of HARDWARE_CURSOR_BIT_ORDER_MSBFIRST in radeon_cursor.c. (In reply to comment #6) > You also need to disable the setting of HARDWARE_CURSOR_BIT_ORDER_MSBFIRST in > radeon_cursor.c. > That solved it. Cursor looks allright again. Thanks. Hope to see it upstream soon. Created attachment 11802 [details] [review] patch for bigendian cursor issue For the sake of completeness I attach the patch that makes the latest ati driver work on my G4 machine. *** Bug 12672 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** Did any fix get applied here? Would the xserver patch be acceptable for 1.4.1? (In reply to comment #10) > Did any fix get applied here? No. > Would the xserver patch be acceptable for 1.4.1? No, it was rejected. Michel, are you sure your initial patch was incorrect ? It looks to me like it's actually the proper fix, along with removing the bogus bit from the radeon driver for BE, no ? (In reply to comment #12) I was worried about breaking radeon on little endian, but looking at it now that might not be the case. If somebody could confirm that, the patch at least probably doesn't make the existing code any worse... I just tested out a combination of both Michel's first patch and chrschmitt's patch on my iBook (bigendian radeon) and it works properly. We'll still need someone to test it out on a little endian radeon box though. Both patches work great here for months on my iBook G4 (radeon), even with the Git version of the drivers. Would be great to finally see them applied upstream. BTW: the patch is not from me. I just got the link to it moths ago from a developer. Both patches work fine here on my AMD64 box with R480. Using xorg-server-1.3.0.0-r5 from portage, and xf86-video-ati from git. The first patch alone works on my i965 X61 Thinkpad also :). Running xorg-server-1.4.0.90-r2 from portage. So, it appears it *is* the correct fix? Can we give this bug some love? Committed. xserver: 267352579612155adfd4743432d6569b2cdeebde radeon: 5e3b21284482df9974c9a58f248f0100def2bb0c (In reply to comment #19) > Committed. > xserver: 267352579612155adfd4743432d6569b2cdeebde Thanks, but it looks like you pushed the second attachment, while we were talking about the first one. (In reply to comment #20) > (In reply to comment #19) > > Committed. > > xserver: 267352579612155adfd4743432d6569b2cdeebde > > Thanks, but it looks like you pushed the second attachment, while we were > talking about the first one. > Sorry fixed: da973e962d09854b571320dee7dd9569060bc39e *** Bug 16019 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** |
Use of freedesktop.org services, including Bugzilla, is subject to our Code of Conduct. How we collect and use information is described in our Privacy Policy.