Created attachment 70778 [details] Full dmesg that I've got; Kernel was booted with drm.debug=1 I have dual-graphics laptop (AMD Fusion A6 based). Here's the hardware spec: 00:01.0 VGA compatible controller: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD] nee ATI BeaverCreek [Radeon HD 6520G] 02:00.0 VGA compatible controller: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD] nee ATI Caicos [Radeon HD 6400M/7400M Series] I can boot into console with KMS enabled, but when I start X Windows (twm, so, not 3D, I believe), I get corrupted screen and the mouse cursor is either locked or unlocked periodically (about 10 seconds for every state). Xorg.log shows "EQ overflow" errors. Graphics stack: - DRM: radeon module; Kernel v3.6.5; - Mesa 9.0.1; - glamor(git) - xf86-video-ati(git); built with --enable-glamor; P.S.: With EXA or even without explicit definition of "AccelMethod" the problem remains the same. It is the same either with xf86-video-ati 7.0.0 (non-git). Attaching dmesg and xorg log.
Created attachment 70779 [details] Xorg log
Created attachment 70781 [details] dmesg -l err,warn
Looks like a duplicate of bug 56720. Does disabling colortiling help? Option "ColorTiling2D" "false" in the device section of your xorg.conf
> Does disabling colortiling help? Definitely. Thank you very much! I have couple of questions, though (if you have a minute): 1. Do I miss any features (or performance) with the ColorTiling2D option OFF? 2. Is it Ok that I have mentions of EXA in Xorg.0.conf while I have Glamor selected as AccellMethod (I thought Glamor was a _replacement_ for EXA)? Or, is it an indication that I built something wrong?
(In reply to comment #4) > > Does disabling colortiling help? > > Definitely. Thank you very much! > > > I have couple of questions, though (if you have a minute): > > 1. Do I miss any features (or performance) with the ColorTiling2D option OFF? Yes, tiling improves performance. > > 2. Is it Ok that I have mentions of EXA in Xorg.0.conf while I have Glamor > selected as AccellMethod (I thought Glamor was a _replacement_ for EXA)? Or, > is it an indication that I built something wrong? Glamor is an alternative for EXA. If you are still getting EXA, something is wrong with your glamor setup. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 56720 ***
I'm not sure what I get in the end. Xorg.0.org says it loads Glamor and there are no errors on this topic, than it says it loads EXA. > egrep -i "exa|glamor" /var/log/Xorg.0.log > [ 470.608] (II) LoadModule: "glamoregl" > [ 470.608] (II) Loading /usr/lib/xorg/modules/libglamoregl.so > [ 470.610] (II) Module glamoregl: vendor="X.Org Foundation" > [ 470.621] (**) RADEON(0): Option "AccelMethod" "glamor" > [ 470.621] (II) Loading sub module "exa" > [ 470.621] (II) LoadModule: "exa" > [ 470.621] (II) Loading /usr/lib/xorg/modules/libexa.so > [ 470.622] (II) Module exa: vendor="X.Org Foundation" > [ 471.019] (II) RADEON(0): Using exact sizes for initial modes > [ 471.019] (II) RADEON(0): EXA: Driver will allow EXA pixmaps in VRAM > [ 471.020] (II) RADEON(0): Setting EXA maxPitchBytes > [ 471.020] (II) EXA(0): Driver allocated offscreen pixmaps > [ 471.020] (II) EXA(0): Driver registered support for the following operations: Is there a command I could issue being under X to know it for sure? Also, is there a Radeon-specific guide for building Glamor? This one(a bit Intel-ish) seem did not work for me: http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/Glamor
(In reply to comment #6) > > Is there a command I could issue being under X to know it for sure? You should see: [ 22.697] (II) RADEON(0): Use GLAMOR acceleration. [ 22.698] (II) RADEON(0): Acceleration enabled In your xorg log. > > Also, is there a Radeon-specific guide for building Glamor? This one(a bit > Intel-ish) seem did not work for me: > http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/Glamor You'll need to build radeon with the --enable-glamor configure option.
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.