From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1ERTUu-0006JJ-JL for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 17 Oct 2005 11:49:45 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with SMTP id j9HBkf6j011369; Mon, 17 Oct 2005 11:46:41 GMT Received: from ciao.gmane.org (main.gmane.org [80.91.229.2]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with ESMTP id j9HBkfRv017966 for ; Mon, 17 Oct 2005 11:46:41 GMT Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1ERTSD-0007GJ-24 for gentoo-amd64@lists.gentoo.org; Mon, 17 Oct 2005 13:46:57 +0200 Received: from ip68-230-97-182.ph.ph.cox.net ([68.230.97.182]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 17 Oct 2005 13:46:57 +0200 Received: from 1i5t5.duncan by ip68-230-97-182.ph.ph.cox.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 17 Oct 2005 13:46:57 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-amd64@lists.gentoo.org From: Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net> Subject: [gentoo-amd64] Re: Re: mtrr: base is not aligned Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 04:45:47 -0700 Organization: Sometimes Message-ID: References: <5bdc1c8b0510151118p447b72a9la959017a0de1dd08@mail.gmail.com> <5bdc1c8b0510161150r27a36415pf435d4f9ab6ea638@mail.gmail.com> <4352EDBE.7030503@gmx.net> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-amd64@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: ip68-230-97-182.ph.ph.cox.net User-Agent: Pan/0.14.2.91 (As She Crawled Across the Table) Sender: news X-Archives-Salt: 33e7d709-2120-491c-956a-5505b939f14f X-Archives-Hash: 104f69fe8ad1ff28a9880bb09450e4b9 Marco Matthies posted <4352EDBE.7030503@gmx.net>, excerpted below, on Mon, 17 Oct 2005 02:18:06 +0200: > Here's someone who is also getting these huge reported memory sizes: > http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/9/12/35 > Found it by googling for 983552MB, there's more there. > > There's is some info on mtrr's with vesafb here: > /usr/src/linux-2.6.13-gentoo-r3/Documentation/fb/vesafb.txt, line 176 > Seems to suggest trying video=vesafb:nomtrr if you're using vesafb. > > Also some other reports seem to hint at Xorg as the culprit: > https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4310 > and others found by googling "mtrr: type mismatch for". > > You might want to also grep Xorg.log for the addresses provided by > 'cat /proc/mtrr' or just the prefix such as > 'grep -in 0xd /var/log/Xorg.0.log' in my case, that should some results > (Xorg.log doesn't seem to mention mtrr literally, as far as i can see). Same here. The address range corresponds, but mtrr isn't mentioned by name in xorg.conf. You can check video memory (and a couple other items) by running lspci -v. Look for the line that has a size in megs, under the correct video device, of course... This is all great fun and I sure learned a lot yesterday researching, then putting it into words therefore anchoring it in my memory as well as forcing myself to contemplate angles for the purpose of writing that I wouldn't necessarily see, otherwise. However, Saturday nite is my Monday, and I spent all of my Monday nite researching and writing this and a couple other technical replies... and got only an hour or so of sleep! So... tonite I'm going to try to avoid getting too deeply involved in this and ignore the additional research I now want to do given the above links! Maybe that way I can get some sleep today (day=nite for me, nite=day)! ... One of the things that is making this interesting for me, is that I've been trying to run dual Radeons for some time, one AGP one PCI, each with two outputs so I can run FOUR 21" monitors instead of only TWO, like I used to run an NVidia (Twinview) with the closed drivers and an old cheap S3 Virge (giving me three monitors, then a 19" and two 17"), a couple years ago. However, I keep getting conflicting resources when I try. I've always wanted to take the time to see if I could grok things well enough to try and reconfigure around the issue, and this is giving me the motivation (and additional brain power) to grasp at least one angle of it. I'm not sure that's actually what's conflicting, as I haven't tried running it that way for awhile, but I'm at least developing enough understanding now to make a bit of sense of things and figure out from the errors where the problem actually is, now, when I get a chance to get back to it. That's /miles/ farther than I was, previously! In addition, few enough folks actually grok this stuff that if I can get it, I'm sure the knowledge will be of help to quite a few others, as well. Oh... Previously I was trying to run a separate "screen" config for each monitor, thus, two per card since each card has two outputs. I'm now running xorg's merged framebuffer for Radeons, so it's actually possible the problem will have disappeared when I actually try it again... So anyway, that's why I'm spending so much time on this myself... The knowledge gained at this point can be of help to at least two, and later others, so it's not just me gaining immediate benefit, nor is it just you. However, the research will work better when I'm rested, so tomorrow or later this week... -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman in http://www.linuxdevcenter.com/pub/a/linux/2004/12/22/rms_interview.html -- gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org mailing list