[gentoo-user] about boot with framebuffer

[gentoo-user] about boot with framebuffer

[Harry Putnam]

I've been booting with a framebuffer for some time.  So long that I
fear my kernel line may be out of date.

At any rate my settings are apparently causing the resolution setting
to be ignored and I'm sometimes asked for a selection and sometimes it
just boots with the huge 80x25 standard.  Sometimes it even obeys the
settings.

I have these set in the kernel: 
  CONFIG_FB_BOOT_VESA_SUPPORT=y
  CONFIG_FB_VESA=y
  CONFIG_MTRR=y

The grub.conf lines I've used for something like 100 yrs, looks like
this:

    /vmlinuz  root=/dev/hda5 vga=0x31b video=vesfb:mtrr:3,ywrap

I don't recall anymore where I got all of that but I think the only
things I've changed are the 0x31b to some other hexidecimal setting
and the digit following mtrr.  Seems like it was once a 2.

I got the 0x31b from the vga chart in kernel sources.  I'm pretty sure
it was once in a file named vga.txt

I changed the 0x31b according to the capabilities of the graphics card
a few times.

I'm looking for vga.txt right now in current sources but I don't think
its there anymore.

Ahh my search: 
   find /usr/src/linux/ -type f -exec grep -l 0x31b {} \;

turned up only *.c *.S and one *.sa files... no vga.txt
[
 /usr/src/linux/fs/hfsplus/tables.c
 /usr/src/linux/arch/m68k/ifpsp060/fpsp.sa
 /usr/src/linux/sound/drivers/opl4/opl4_synth.c
 /usr/src/linux/drivers/media/dvb/frontends/s5h1411.c
 /usr/src/linux/.tmp_kallsyms1.S
 /usr/src/linux/.tmp_kallsyms2.S
 /usr/src/linux/.tmp_kallsyms3.S
 /usr/src/linux/crypto/khazad.c
 /usr/src/linux/crypto/tgr192.c
 /usr/src/linux/crypto/wp512.c 
]
 
To me, the old standby of vga5 is still to large and the smaller ones
in that series just look really sqatty and terrible.

Is my setup still functional or outdated now?  I'd like to get
resolution of at least 1024x768 but higher is even better.

Any suggestions for a better setup?

Re: [gentoo-user] about boot with framebuffer

[Albert Hopkins]

On Sunday, July 3 at 16:39 (-0500), Harry Putnam said:

> I've been booting with a framebuffer for some time.  So long that I
> fear my kernel line may be out of date.
> 

A lot of people nowadays are using KMS.  It's the one true way™ for
doing console/X mode settings.  But if you have a procraprietary driver
it may not work.

http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/xorg-config.xml#doc_chap2

[gentoo-user] Re: about boot with framebuffer

[Harry Putnam]

Albert Hopkins <marduk@letterboxes.org> writes:

> On Sunday, July 3 at 16:39 (-0500), Harry Putnam said:
>
>> I've been booting with a framebuffer for some time.  So long that I
>> fear my kernel line may be out of date.
>> 
>
> A lot of people nowadays are using KMS.  It's the one true way™ for
> doing console/X mode settings.  But if you have a procraprietary driver
> it may not work.
>
> http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/xorg-config.xml#doc_chap2

this is a no X machine... it appears at the cited URL they expect you
to be running xorg.

What I'm after is a console Framebuffer with higher resolution to
shink the fonts down and enlarge the terminal. (on a console)

I've been able to do this for years using VESA.  

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: about boot with framebuffer

[covici]

Harry Putnam <reader@newsguy.com> wrote:

> Albert Hopkins <marduk@letterboxes.org> writes:
> 
> > On Sunday, July 3 at 16:39 (-0500), Harry Putnam said:
> >
> >> I've been booting with a framebuffer for some time.  So long that I
> >> fear my kernel line may be out of date.
> >> 
> >
> > A lot of people nowadays are using KMS.  It's the one true way™ for
> > doing console/X mode settings.  But if you have a procraprietary driver
> > it may not work.
> >
> > http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/xorg-config.xml#doc_chap2
> 
> this is a no X machine... it appears at the cited URL they expect you
> to be running xorg.
> 
> What I'm after is a console Framebuffer with higher resolution to
> shink the fonts down and enlarge the terminal. (on a console)
> 
> I've been able to do this for years using VESA.  
> 
I use uvesafb and it works without X -- I get 60x164, depending on the
resolution your mileage may vary.

-- 
Your life is like a penny.  You're going to lose it.  The question is:
How do
you spend it?

         John Covici
         covici@ccs.covici.com

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: about boot with framebuffer

[Albert Hopkins]

On Sunday, July 3 at 22:07 (-0500), Harry Putnam said:
> this is a no X machine... it appears at the cited URL they expect you
> to be running xorg.

KMS doesn't require X, but Xorg can use it.  Basically Xorg can let the
kernel handle graphics mode setting and gets out of the way.

But KMS doesn't require X.  The link I provided shows how to enable KMS.
it just happens to be in part of the Xorg docs.

-a

[gentoo-user] Re: about boot with framebuffer

[Harry Putnam]

Albert Hopkins <marduk@letterboxes.org> writes:

> On Sunday, July 3 at 22:07 (-0500), Harry Putnam said:
>> this is a no X machine... it appears at the cited URL they expect you
>> to be running xorg.
>
> KMS doesn't require X, but Xorg can use it.  Basically Xorg can let the
> kernel handle graphics mode setting and gets out of the way.
>
> But KMS doesn't require X.  The link I provided shows how to enable KMS.
> it just happens to be in part of the Xorg docs.
>

Are you saying it does not require `xorg-x11'.

Step 2) says in large type:
   `2.  Installing Xorg'

Then a big note in a green box later on says:

,----
| Note: You could install the xorg-x11 metapackage instead of the more
| lightweight xorg-server. Functionally, xorg-x11 and xorg-server are
| the same. However, xorg-x11 brings in many more packages that you
| probably don't need, such as a huge assortment of fonts in many
| different languages. They're not necessary for a working desktop.
`----

So I'm a little confused.

-------        ---------       ---=---       ---------      -------- 

The way I've been doing this only required `vesa' or `uvesa' and some
special kernel line stuff.  None of the X related stuff is necessary.

From covici's post... I think I may need to say uvesa where I've been
saying vesa.

I'm going to try that some time today.  Its already enabled in my kernel

[gentoo-user] Re: about boot with framebuffer

[Harry Putnam]

covici@ccs.covici.com writes:

>> I've been able to do this for years using VESA.  
>> 
> I use uvesafb and it works without X -- I get 60x164, depending on the
> resolution your mileage may vary.

If it done in the kernel line of grub.conf?  I realize it must be
enabled in kernel and I have done that.

If it involves grub.conf, would you mind posting what you have in
there?

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: about boot with framebuffer

[Mark Knecht]

On Mon, Jul 4, 2011 at 11:10 AM, Harry Putnam <reader@newsguy.com> wrote:
> Albert Hopkins <marduk@letterboxes.org> writes:
>
>> On Sunday, July 3 at 22:07 (-0500), Harry Putnam said:
>>> this is a no X machine... it appears at the cited URL they expect you
>>> to be running xorg.
>>
>> KMS doesn't require X, but Xorg can use it.  Basically Xorg can let the
>> kernel handle graphics mode setting and gets out of the way.
>>
>> But KMS doesn't require X.  The link I provided shows how to enable KMS.
>> it just happens to be in part of the Xorg docs.
>>
>
> Are you saying it does not require `xorg-x11'.
>
> Step 2) says in large type:
>   `2.  Installing Xorg'
>
> Then a big note in a green box later on says:
>
> ,----
> | Note: You could install the xorg-x11 metapackage instead of the more
> | lightweight xorg-server. Functionally, xorg-x11 and xorg-server are
> | the same. However, xorg-x11 brings in many more packages that you
> | probably don't need, such as a huge assortment of fonts in many
> | different languages. They're not necessary for a working desktop.
> `----
>
> So I'm a little confused.
>
> -------        ---------       ---=---       ---------      --------
>
> The way I've been doing this only required `vesa' or `uvesa' and some
> special kernel line stuff.  None of the X related stuff is necessary.
>
> From covici's post... I think I may need to say uvesa where I've been
> saying vesa.
>
> I'm going to try that some time today.  Its already enabled in my kernel
>

I'm a little confused by his post also, but I've never run a machine
without Xorg so maybe it's a technical point. With a framebuffer I
believe you can get a boot screen like the Install CD - a bunch of
little Tux's across the top - so you're doing graphics at that point
but you're not running X?

I was curious about this topic awhile back wondering if you could run
a Gentoo VM with only a framebuffer and get any graphics at all, or is
it just that the framebuffer is used to give you more control over the
console font/height/width selection.

(I've never run a framebuffer, if that's not obvious!) ;-)

- Mark

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: about boot with framebuffer

[covici]

Harry Putnam <reader@newsguy.com> wrote:

> covici@ccs.covici.com writes:
> 
> >> I've been able to do this for years using VESA.  
> >> 
> > I use uvesafb and it works without X -- I get 60x164, depending on the
> > resolution your mileage may vary.
> 
> If it done in the kernel line of grub.conf?  I realize it must be
> enabled in kernel and I have done that.
> 
> If it involves grub.conf, would you mind posting what you have in
> there?
> 
Add the following to your line:
video=uvesafb:1280x1024 vmalloc=256M 
Change the numbers to meet your screen resolution.

For this to work you need uvesafb to be built in to the kernel -- at
least that is the way it worked for me.

-- 
Your life is like a penny.  You're going to lose it.  The question is:
How do
you spend it?

         John Covici
         covici@ccs.covici.com

[gentoo-user] Re: about boot with framebuffer

[Nikos Chantziaras]

On 07/04/2011 09:10 PM, Harry Putnam wrote:
> Albert Hopkins<marduk@letterboxes.org>  writes:
>> On Sunday, July 3 at 22:07 (-0500), Harry Putnam said:
>>> this is a no X machine... it appears at the cited URL they expect you
>>> to be running xorg.
>>
>> KMS doesn't require X, but Xorg can use it.  Basically Xorg can let the
>> kernel handle graphics mode setting and gets out of the way.
>
> Are you saying it does not require `xorg-x11'.
>
> Step 2) says in large type:
>     `2.  Installing Xorg'
>
> Then a big note in a green box later on says:
>
> ,----
> | Note: You could install the xorg-x11 metapackage instead of the more
> | lightweight xorg-server. Functionally, xorg-x11 and xorg-server are
> | the same. However, xorg-x11 brings in many more packages that you
> | probably don't need, such as a huge assortment of fonts in many
> | different languages. They're not necessary for a working desktop.
> `----
>
> So I'm a little confused.

The guide deals with how to make X.Org use KMS.  That does not mean that 
KMS requires X.  For your X-less machine, all you need to do is enable 
the driver for your card in the kernel config, and make sure to also 
enable KMS.  You need to disable the VESA/uvesafb drivers to avoid 
conflicts.

What graphics card do you have, btw?

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: about boot with framebuffer

[Albert Hopkins]

On Monday, July 4 at 13:10 (-0500), Harry Putnam said:

> Are you saying it does not require `xorg-x11'.
> 
> Step 2) says in large type:
>    `2.  Installing Xorg'
> 
> Then a big note in a green box later on says:
> 
> ,----
> | Note: You could install the xorg-x11 metapackage instead of the more
> | lightweight xorg-server. Functionally, xorg-x11 and xorg-server are
> | the same. However, xorg-x11 brings in many more packages that you
> | probably don't need, such as a huge assortment of fonts in many
> | different languages. They're not necessary for a working desktop.
> `----
> 
> So I'm a little confused.

Perhaps pointing to the xorg documentation was a mistake.  I only
pointed there because it had instructions on setting up KMS.

KMS (kernel mode setting) does not require X.  It gives the kernel the
ability to set the modes of your graphics cards, more efficiently and
usually beyond the capabilities of what the *vesa drivers can do.
Perhaps a better, non X-centered explanation of what KMS is can be found
here [1].

Regardless, KMS is the newer, better, what-all-the-cool-kids-are-doinger
way to what we've traditionally called "framebuffer console".  It also
helps with X, especially switching between console and Xorg (faster and
more seamless).  It also gives you some xrandr-like abilities for the
console.

E.g. my laptop does native 1366x768 but does not support that vesa mode
(it's not in the VESA standard afaik). But KMS can set that mode without
me even having to specify it.[2]

Anyway some proprietary X drivers (I've heard) don't support KMS (some
still don't even support xrandr), but if you are not running Xorg then
that may not be applicable to you anyway.

[1]
http://kernelnewbies.org/Linux_2_6_29#head-e1bab8dc862e3b477cc38d87e8ddc779a66509d1

[2] http://ompldr.org/vOWN0cg/kms.png

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: about boot with framebuffer

[Alan McKinnon]

On Monday 04 July 2011 11:20:43 Mark Knecht did opine thusly:
> > The way I've been doing this only required `vesa' or `uvesa' and
> > some special kernel line stuff.  None of the X related stuff is
> > necessary.
> > 
> > From covici's post... I think I may need to say uvesa where I've
> > been saying vesa.
> > 
> > I'm going to try that some time today.  Its already enabled in
> > my kernel
> 
> I'm a little confused by his post also, but I've never run a machine
> without Xorg so maybe it's a technical point. With a framebuffer I
> believe you can get a boot screen like the Install CD - a bunch of
> little Tux's across the top - so you're doing graphics at that
> point but you're not running X?
> 
> I was curious about this topic awhile back wondering if you could
> run a Gentoo VM with only a framebuffer and get any graphics at
> all, or is it just that the framebuffer is used to give you more
> control over the console font/height/width selection.
> 
> (I've never run a framebuffer, if that's not obvious!)

bootsplash does not run under X (well, on redhat it used to, but you 
really don't want to go there) - this should be obvious as you don't 
see the X start-up sequence happening at early boot time.

There are many things boot splash could use for displaying images 
(fbcon etc etc) or even something of it's own invention. I'm not 
familiar enough with it to say how it really does it.


-- 
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: about boot with framebuffer

[Mark Knecht]

On Mon, Jul 4, 2011 at 1:40 PM, Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Monday 04 July 2011 11:20:43 Mark Knecht did opine thusly:
>> > The way I've been doing this only required `vesa' or `uvesa' and
>> > some special kernel line stuff.  None of the X related stuff is
>> > necessary.
>> >
>> > From covici's post... I think I may need to say uvesa where I've
>> > been saying vesa.
>> >
>> > I'm going to try that some time today.  Its already enabled in
>> > my kernel
>>
>> I'm a little confused by his post also, but I've never run a machine
>> without Xorg so maybe it's a technical point. With a framebuffer I
>> believe you can get a boot screen like the Install CD - a bunch of
>> little Tux's across the top - so you're doing graphics at that
>> point but you're not running X?
>>
>> I was curious about this topic awhile back wondering if you could
>> run a Gentoo VM with only a framebuffer and get any graphics at
>> all, or is it just that the framebuffer is used to give you more
>> control over the console font/height/width selection.
>>
>> (I've never run a framebuffer, if that's not obvious!)
>
> bootsplash does not run under X (well, on redhat it used to, but you
> really don't want to go there) - this should be obvious as you don't
> see the X start-up sequence happening at early boot time.
>
> There are many things boot splash could use for displaying images
> (fbcon etc etc) or even something of it's own invention. I'm not
> familiar enough with it to say how it really does it.
>
>
> --
> alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
>
so does bootsplash run using framebuffer or is it completely different?

- Mark

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: about boot with framebuffer

[Alan McKinnon]

On Monday 04 July 2011 13:47:28 Mark Knecht did opine thusly:
> On Mon, Jul 4, 2011 at 1:40 PM, Alan McKinnon 
<alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Monday 04 July 2011 11:20:43 Mark Knecht did opine thusly:
> >> > The way I've been doing this only required `vesa' or
> >> > `uvesa' and some special kernel line stuff.  None of the
> >> > X related stuff is necessary.
> >> > 
> >> > From covici's post... I think I may need to say uvesa
> >> > where I've been saying vesa.
> >> > 
> >> > I'm going to try that some time today.  Its already
> >> > enabled in
> >> > my kernel
> >> 
> >> I'm a little confused by his post also, but I've never run a
> >> machine without Xorg so maybe it's a technical point. With a
> >> framebuffer I believe you can get a boot screen like the
> >> Install CD - a bunch of little Tux's across the top - so
> >> you're doing graphics at that point but you're not running X?
> >> 
> >> I was curious about this topic awhile back wondering if you
> >> could run a Gentoo VM with only a framebuffer and get any
> >> graphics at all, or is it just that the framebuffer is used
> >> to give you more control over the console font/height/width
> >> selection.
> >> 
> >> (I've never run a framebuffer, if that's not obvious!)
> > 
> > bootsplash does not run under X (well, on redhat it used to, but
> > you really don't want to go there) - this should be obvious as
> > you don't see the X start-up sequence happening at early boot
> > time.
> > 
> > There are many things boot splash could use for displaying
> > images
> > (fbcon etc etc) or even something of it's own invention. I'm not
> > familiar enough with it to say how it really does it.
> > 
> > 
> > --
> > alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
> 
> so does bootsplash run using framebuffer or is it completely
> different?

I have no idea actually. I could say it must run in a framebuffer-like 
abstraction but that is obvious and doesn't tell you anything you 
don't already know.

Spock is the dev that knows most about these things, a good first 
research point would be to search his name and find related docs.

Sorry I can't be more help - I have the concepts in my head but not 
the facts



-- 
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: about boot with framebuffer

[Mark Knecht]

On Mon, Jul 4, 2011 at 1:57 PM, Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Monday 04 July 2011 13:47:28 Mark Knecht did opine thusly:
>> On Mon, Jul 4, 2011 at 1:40 PM, Alan McKinnon
> <alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > On Monday 04 July 2011 11:20:43 Mark Knecht did opine thusly:
>> >> > The way I've been doing this only required `vesa' or
>> >> > `uvesa' and some special kernel line stuff.  None of the
>> >> > X related stuff is necessary.
>> >> >
>> >> > From covici's post... I think I may need to say uvesa
>> >> > where I've been saying vesa.
>> >> >
>> >> > I'm going to try that some time today.  Its already
>> >> > enabled in
>> >> > my kernel
>> >>
>> >> I'm a little confused by his post also, but I've never run a
>> >> machine without Xorg so maybe it's a technical point. With a
>> >> framebuffer I believe you can get a boot screen like the
>> >> Install CD - a bunch of little Tux's across the top - so
>> >> you're doing graphics at that point but you're not running X?
>> >>
>> >> I was curious about this topic awhile back wondering if you
>> >> could run a Gentoo VM with only a framebuffer and get any
>> >> graphics at all, or is it just that the framebuffer is used
>> >> to give you more control over the console font/height/width
>> >> selection.
>> >>
>> >> (I've never run a framebuffer, if that's not obvious!)
>> >
>> > bootsplash does not run under X (well, on redhat it used to, but
>> > you really don't want to go there) - this should be obvious as
>> > you don't see the X start-up sequence happening at early boot
>> > time.
>> >
>> > There are many things boot splash could use for displaying
>> > images
>> > (fbcon etc etc) or even something of it's own invention. I'm not
>> > familiar enough with it to say how it really does it.
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
>>
>> so does bootsplash run using framebuffer or is it completely
>> different?
>
> I have no idea actually. I could say it must run in a framebuffer-like
> abstraction but that is obvious and doesn't tell you anything you
> don't already know.
>
> Spock is the dev that knows most about these things, a good first
> research point would be to search his name and find related docs.
>
> Sorry I can't be more help - I have the concepts in my head but not
> the facts
>

I appreciate the info. No worries about that.

I think the other point I'm missing here is whether KMS is actually
implementing anything graphical, like a framebuffer, or whether it's
just moving _choices_ about graphics into the kernel and out of X?

I have an Intel i5-661/Intel MB based machine which is the only one I
use KMS for at this time. On that machine I was instructed to use KMS
by the Intel-Gfx devs to get their driver working at all. A nice side
benefit was that it resulted in better text in the console during
boot. However I don't see anything 'graphics like' on that box just
using KMS so I suspect that while I've enabled technology that allows
the kernel to manage graphics that I haven't told the kernel to
actually do so. I don't know though.

All of my other machines are NVidia based and use the closed source
driver so my understanding on those is that KMS doesn't apply.

I'm curious, however, about my Gentoo VMs. Can KMS run on a VM's
kernel and do anything useful there? This is more for learning and not
about any practical need at this time.

Cheers,
Mark

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: about boot with framebuffer

[Alan McKinnon]

On Monday 04 July 2011 14:15:12 Mark Knecht did opine thusly:
> On Mon, Jul 4, 2011 at 1:57 PM, Alan McKinnon 
<alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Monday 04 July 2011 13:47:28 Mark Knecht did opine thusly:
> >> On Mon, Jul 4, 2011 at 1:40 PM, Alan McKinnon



> >> so does bootsplash run using framebuffer or is it completely
> >> different?
> > 
> > I have no idea actually. I could say it must run in a
> > framebuffer-like abstraction but that is obvious and doesn't
> > tell you anything you don't already know.
> > 
> > Spock is the dev that knows most about these things, a good
> > first
> > research point would be to search his name and find related
> > docs.
> > 
> > Sorry I can't be more help - I have the concepts in my head but
> > not the facts
> 
> I appreciate the info. No worries about that.
> 
> I think the other point I'm missing here is whether KMS is actually
> implementing anything graphical, like a framebuffer, or whether it's
> just moving _choices_ about graphics into the kernel and out of X?

By definition a framebuffer is a chunk of memory, and my understanding 
is that KMS does implement one (nouveau definitely provides a 
framebuffer, and it conflicts with all other framebuffers - you can't 
have more than one in the kernel at all). The clue is in the name: 
Kernel Mode Switching. It deals with all the low-level commands to set 
modes in the graphics card so that X doesn't have to do it itself.

> 
> I have an Intel i5-661/Intel MB based machine which is the only one
> I use KMS for at this time. On that machine I was instructed to use
> KMS by the Intel-Gfx devs to get their driver working at all. A
> nice side benefit was that it resulted in better text in the
> console during boot. However I don't see anything 'graphics like'
> on that box just using KMS so I suspect that while I've enabled
> technology that allows the kernel to manage graphics that I haven't
> told the kernel to actually do so. I don't know though.

When you speak of graphics in the context of framebuffers and 
consoles, it's better to think in terms of "able to do what graphics 
does" i.e. address a gigantic number of pixels individually. The fact 
that you are not running any software capable of rendering graphics 
doesn't reduce the fact that the means to do is there.

> All of my other machines are NVidia based and use the closed source
> driver so my understanding on those is that KMS doesn't apply.

Yes, that's true.

nVidia does it's own bizarre weird stuff that will forever more be 
incompatible with the entire free software world <sigh>


> I'm curious, however, about my Gentoo VMs. Can KMS run on a VM's
> kernel and do anything useful there? This is more for learning and
> not about any practical need at this time.

From my understanding, this topic gets yucky. There's a whole bunch of 
ways this could be done, from software emulation to para-
virtualization to full virtualization. Emulation is easy - KMS in the 
guest sees what looks for all the world like hardware so everything 
works if KMS supports the emulated card (albeit slowly). For 
everything else, you'd need kernel drivers intercepting efforts to 
talk to the hardware and be traffic cop. My brain is already spinning 
on this so please excuse me while I go dunk my head in a bucket and 
not think about it anymore :-)







> 
> Cheers,
> Mark
-- 
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: about boot with framebuffer

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 826 bytes --]

On Mon, 04 Jul 2011 23:34:41 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:

> > I'm curious, however, about my Gentoo VMs. Can KMS run on a VM's
> > kernel and do anything useful there? This is more for learning and
> > not about any practical need at this time.  
> 
> From my understanding, this topic gets yucky. There's a whole bunch of 
> ways this could be done, from software emulation to para-
> virtualization to full virtualization. Emulation is easy - KMS in the 
> guest sees what looks for all the world like hardware so everything 
> works if KMS supports the emulated card (albeit slowly).

However, it can't get a list of supported display resolutions from the
"monitor" so it is fair to say it works in a VM, for some definition of
"works".


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Top Oxymorons Number 19: Passive aggression

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: about boot with framebuffer

[Mark Knecht]

On Mon, Jul 4, 2011 at 2:34 PM, Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Monday 04 July 2011 14:15:12 Mark Knecht did opine thusly:
<SNIP>
>> I'm curious, however, about my Gentoo VMs. Can KMS run on a VM's
>> kernel and do anything useful there? This is more for learning and
>> not about any practical need at this time.
>
> From my understanding, this topic gets yucky. There's a whole bunch of
> ways this could be done, from software emulation to para-
> virtualization to full virtualization. Emulation is easy - KMS in the
> guest sees what looks for all the world like hardware so everything
> works if KMS supports the emulated card (albeit slowly). For
> everything else, you'd need kernel drivers intercepting efforts to
> talk to the hardware and be traffic cop. My brain is already spinning
> on this so please excuse me while I go dunk my head in a bucket and
> not think about it anymore :-)
>

So I'm wondering if the Virtualbox graphics driver
(xf86-video-virtualbox) is a framebuffer local to the VM or something
else?

My NVidia GFX465 running the NVidia driver does about 11,000 FPS in
glxgears in Linux. glxgears running in the VM does about 130FPS, or
around 1% of the performance outside. Yes, it's 'slow', depending on
how we define slow. It's faster then machine I ran native in Linux 5
years ago, and it's very usable for things like browsers, etc.

I don't know what tool to use to measure graphics performance on
Windows but my Windows XP VM is more than fast enough to watch Netflix
full screen at 1920x1080 without any major amount of tearing, so
Virtualbox graphics performance there is fine.

Anyway, just data.

Thanks,
Mark

[gentoo-user] Re: about boot with framebuffer

[Harry Putnam]

Nikos Chantziaras <realnc@arcor.de> writes:


[...]

Harry wrote:
>> So I'm a little confused.

Nikos replied:
> The guide deals with how to make X.Org use KMS.  That does not mean
> that KMS requires X.  For your X-less machine, all you need to do is
> enable the driver for your card in the kernel config, and make sure to
> also enable KMS.  You need to disable the VESA/uvesafb drivers to
> avoid conflicts.
>
> What graphics card do you have, btw?

The gentoo install is a guest (Virtual Box) vm hosted on win 7.
Video information:

From lspci:
VGA compatible controller: InnoTek Systemberatung GmbH VirtualBox 
Graphics Adapter

More from lshw:
             description: VGA compatible controller
             product: VirtualBox Graphics Adapter
             vendor: InnoTek Systemberatung GmbH
             physical id: 2
             bus info: pci@0000:00:02.0
             version: 00
             width: 32 bits
             clock: 33MHz
             capabilities: vga_controller bus_master
             configuration: latency=0
             resources: memory:e0000000-e0ffffff
    

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: about boot with framebuffer

[Joshua Murphy]

On Mon, Jul 4, 2011 at 7:45 PM, Mark Knecht <markknecht@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 4, 2011 at 2:34 PM, Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Monday 04 July 2011 14:15:12 Mark Knecht did opine thusly:
> <SNIP>
>>> I'm curious, however, about my Gentoo VMs. Can KMS run on a VM's
>>> kernel and do anything useful there? This is more for learning and
>>> not about any practical need at this time.
>>
>> From my understanding, this topic gets yucky. There's a whole bunch of
>> ways this could be done, from software emulation to para-
>> virtualization to full virtualization. Emulation is easy - KMS in the
>> guest sees what looks for all the world like hardware so everything
>> works if KMS supports the emulated card (albeit slowly). For
>> everything else, you'd need kernel drivers intercepting efforts to
>> talk to the hardware and be traffic cop. My brain is already spinning
>> on this so please excuse me while I go dunk my head in a bucket and
>> not think about it anymore :-)
>>
>
> So I'm wondering if the Virtualbox graphics driver
> (xf86-video-virtualbox) is a framebuffer local to the VM or something
> else?
>
> My NVidia GFX465 running the NVidia driver does about 11,000 FPS in
> glxgears in Linux. glxgears running in the VM does about 130FPS, or
> around 1% of the performance outside. Yes, it's 'slow', depending on
> how we define slow. It's faster then machine I ran native in Linux 5
> years ago, and it's very usable for things like browsers, etc.
>
> I don't know what tool to use to measure graphics performance on
> Windows but my Windows XP VM is more than fast enough to watch Netflix
> full screen at 1920x1080 without any major amount of tearing, so
> Virtualbox graphics performance there is fine.
>
> Anyway, just data.
>
> Thanks,
> Mark
>
>

GLX is also doing OpenGL 3D rendering which, outside the VM is
hardware accelerated while inside of it the driver has no true,
direct, access to hardware, though if you're one of the very lucky,
there's a chance of halfway workable pass-through via the guest
additions and such, but even that's slow (and I'm not certain it's
available to a *nix guest).

-- 
Poison [BLX]
Joshua M. Murphy

[gentoo-user] Re: about boot with framebuffer

[Nikos Chantziaras]

On 07/05/2011 03:48 AM, Harry Putnam wrote:
> Nikos Chantziaras<realnc@arcor.de>  writes:
> [...]
>
> Harry wrote:
>>> So I'm a little confused.
>
> Nikos replied:
>> The guide deals with how to make X.Org use KMS.  That does not mean
>> that KMS requires X.  For your X-less machine, all you need to do is
>> enable the driver for your card in the kernel config, and make sure to
>> also enable KMS.  You need to disable the VESA/uvesafb drivers to
>> avoid conflicts.
>>
>> What graphics card do you have, btw?
>
> The gentoo install is a guest (Virtual Box) vm hosted on win 7.

I don't think there's a KMS driver for VirtualBox (AFAIK, the kernel has 
one only for VMWare.)  So no need to investigate this further.

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: about boot with framebuffer

[covici]

Albert Hopkins <marduk@letterboxes.org> wrote:

> 
> 
> On Monday, July 4 at 13:10 (-0500), Harry Putnam said:
> 
> > Are you saying it does not require `xorg-x11'.
> > 
> > Step 2) says in large type:
> >    `2.  Installing Xorg'
> > 
> > Then a big note in a green box later on says:
> > 
> > ,----
> > | Note: You could install the xorg-x11 metapackage instead of the more
> > | lightweight xorg-server. Functionally, xorg-x11 and xorg-server are
> > | the same. However, xorg-x11 brings in many more packages that you
> > | probably don't need, such as a huge assortment of fonts in many
> > | different languages. They're not necessary for a working desktop.
> > `----
> > 
> > So I'm a little confused.
> 
> Perhaps pointing to the xorg documentation was a mistake.  I only
> pointed there because it had instructions on setting up KMS.
> 
> KMS (kernel mode setting) does not require X.  It gives the kernel the
> ability to set the modes of your graphics cards, more efficiently and
> usually beyond the capabilities of what the *vesa drivers can do.
> Perhaps a better, non X-centered explanation of what KMS is can be found
> here [1].
> 
> Regardless, KMS is the newer, better, what-all-the-cool-kids-are-doinger
> way to what we've traditionally called "framebuffer console".  It also
> helps with X, especially switching between console and Xorg (faster and
> more seamless).  It also gives you some xrandr-like abilities for the
> console.
> 
> E.g. my laptop does native 1366x768 but does not support that vesa mode
> (it's not in the VESA standard afaik). But KMS can set that mode without
> me even having to specify it.[2]
> 
> Anyway some proprietary X drivers (I've heard) don't support KMS (some
> still don't even support xrandr), but if you are not running Xorg then
> that may not be applicable to you anyway.
> 
> [1]
> http://kernelnewbies.org/Linux_2_6_29#head-e1bab8dc862e3b477cc38d87e8ddc779a66509d1
> 
> [2] http://ompldr.org/vOWN0cg/kms.png

I tried to use kms, but it conflicted with the nvidia driver and did not
give me as much screen size in the console as uvesafb.

-- 
Your life is like a penny.  You're going to lose it.  The question is:
How do
you spend it?

         John Covici
         covici@ccs.covici.com

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: about boot with framebuffer

[Albert Hopkins]

On Tuesday, July 5 at 11:27 (-0400), covici@ccs.covici.com said:

> I tried to use kms, but it conflicted with the nvidia driver and did
> not
> give me as much screen size in the console as uvesafb.

Yeah, you can't use the nvidia driver and KMS at the same time.  You'd
have to use the nouveau driver.