Bug 21369 - rv610 second radeonhd card initialization failed
Summary: rv610 second radeonhd card initialization failed
Status: RESOLVED WONTFIX
Alias: None
Product: xorg
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Driver/radeonhd (show other bugs)
Version: unspecified
Hardware: x86 (IA32) Linux (All)
: medium normal
Assignee: Luc Verhaegen
QA Contact: Xorg Project Team
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2009-04-24 00:27 UTC by Andre Breiler
Modified: 2011-10-16 21:15 UTC (History)
0 users

See Also:
i915 platform:
i915 features:


Attachments
x config (4.28 KB, application/octet-stream)
2009-04-24 00:27 UTC, Andre Breiler
no flags Details
current X server log showing the failed init of the 2nd card (75.84 KB, text/x-log)
2009-04-24 00:28 UTC, Andre Breiler
no flags Details
lspci (11.85 KB, application/octet-stream)
2009-04-24 00:30 UTC, Andre Breiler
no flags Details

Description Andre Breiler 2009-04-24 00:27:20 UTC
Created attachment 25081 [details]
x config

I'm running Ubuntu (x86, 8.10) with two HD2400 cards. Since the last Ubuntu upgrade the 2nd card fails to initialize.
(note this might be a duplicate of 20146 but the last time I had it working was pre 1.x driver versions).
Comment 1 Andre Breiler 2009-04-24 00:28:30 UTC
Created attachment 25082 [details]
current X server log showing the failed init of the 2nd card
Comment 2 Andre Breiler 2009-04-24 00:30:41 UTC
Created attachment 25084 [details]
lspci
Comment 3 Jeremy Huddleston Sequoia 2011-10-16 15:59:51 UTC
Does this issue occur with the preferred ati driver (xf86-vide-ati)?  If so, please move this to the Driver/Radeon component.  

Development of radeonhd has pretty much halted and development focus is on the ati driver.  Please see http://www.x.org/wiki/radeonhd

If the issue does not exist in the ati driver (or if there is no response to this message), this bug will be closed as WONTFIX unless someone contributes a patch.
Comment 4 Andre Breiler 2011-10-16 21:15:56 UTC
I can't test this currently (box is in another country). I'll test this in a different setup (different box, x86-64) and probably opening a new bug then.
Therefore resolving this based on your suggestion.


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.