From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <3802DE1E.37E49762@chpc.utah.edu> Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 01:07:10 -0600 From: Lou Langholtz MIME-Version: 1.0 To: mlan@cpu.lu Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.linuxppc.org Subject: Re: controlfb.c bug in VRAM bank2 check if bank1 References: <199909131813.UAA00324@piglet.cpu.lu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-linuxppc-dev@lists.linuxppc.org List-Id: Michel Lanners wrote: > Hmm... official 2.2.12 does detect my 4 MB... and this is a 7600, so the same > motherboard as the 7500... > Michel Something is wrong then. Using AC's 2.2.13pre15 on my 7500 the driver just doesn't recognize 4MB of VRAM unless I hack the bank2 check. So either you're not really getting all 4MB VRAM detected or the 7600 uses a different hardware configuration than my 7500/100. What does "fbset -i" tell you for size of the frame buffer device? That the 8500 operates as Andrew Fyfe claimed according to the comments in one of the patches that someone sent out make sense. The relevant part of that patch reads: + /* According to Andrew Fyfe , the VRAM behaves like so: */ + /* afyfe: observations from an 8500: + * - with 2M vram in bank 1, it appears at offsets 0, 2M and 4M + * - with 2M vram in bank 2, it appears only at offset 6M + * - with 4M vram, it appears only as a 4M block at offset 0. + */ What you're seeing with your 7600 then just doesn't make sense unless it's video hardware is somehow different than the 7500/100 that I have. The 7500/100 that I have has only four slots where each slot holds a 1MB VRAM memory module. Is that the same on the 7600? If the 7600 really has the control video card and yours really has 4MB VRAM then according to sources the memory must be detectable at both offset 0, and 6M where the second VRAM bank can actually also handle itself in a contiguous 4MB block from offset 0. That seems very odd indeed. ** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/