[gentoo-user] (II) NV(0): Setting screen physical size to 508 x 317

[gentoo-user] (II) NV(0): Setting screen physical size to 508 x 317

[Erik]

The problem is this line in /var/log/Xorg.0.log:
(II) NV(0): Setting screen physical size to 508 x 317

I have measured the screen and it is actually (approximately) 368 × 230.
This error causes fonts to be shown in the wrong size (too small). I
think that the fonts became smaller after some upgrade during the last
few months. I do not know if it was correct before that or if it was
just wrong in a different way. I tried to tell it the correct values in
/etc/X11/xorg.conf:
Section "Monitor"
  Identifier "Monitor"
  DisplaySize 368 230
EndSection

Section "Screen"
  Identifier "Screen"
  Monitor "Monitor"
EndSection

It is read without problems:
(==) Using config file: "/etc/X11/xorg.conf"
(==) No Layout section.  Using the first Screen section.
(**) |-->Screen "Screen" (0)
(**) |   |-->Monitor "Monitor"

But then it sets the wrong physical size anyway! Is there anything to do
besides reporting a bug and waiting?

(There are other issues with this video device; it shows only 25 × 80
characters in the virtual terminals (should be 75 × 240). This is the
new Dell vostro|1720 from November, that replaced the old INSPIRON|8600
aquired 5 years earlier, with radeon driver. That old device worked fine
without any configuration files. The physical screen size was detected
and the virtual kernel output switched to 75 × 240 characters as soon as
the device was detected.)

[gentoo-user] Re: (II) NV(0): Setting screen physical size to 508 x 317

[walt]

On 07/15/2010 02:15 AM, Erik wrote:

> ...This is the
> new Dell vostro|1720 from November, that replaced the old INSPIRON|8600
> aquired 5 years earlier...

I feel as if I'm reading a post that I selected at random from the middle of a
long thread with lots of previous questions and answers that I can't see.

I've never heard of either of those products.  Maybe someone else knows what
they are?

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: (II) NV(0): Setting screen physical size to 508 x 317

[Erik]

2010-07-16 01:51, walt skrev:
> On 07/15/2010 02:15 AM, Erik wrote:
>
>> ...This is the
>> new Dell vostro|1720 from November, that replaced the old INSPIRON|8600
>> aquired 5 years earlier...
>
> I feel as if I'm reading a post that I selected at random from the
> middle of a long thread with lots of previous questions and answers
> that I can't see.
>
> I've never heard of either of those products.  Maybe someone else
> knows what
> they are?


Do not worry about not knowing about the products that I mentioned in
the parenthesis in the last paragraph (they are just some laptops with
differend graphic cards built in). You may know enough to help if you
are familiar with Xorg, in particular the driver called NV (as the first
2 lines of my post shows). Do you for example know from where the driver
gets the bogus physical display size 508 x 317 from, and why it insists
on using it instead of the configured size?

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: (II) NV(0): Setting screen physical size to 508 x 317

[Dale]

Erik wrote:
> 2010-07-16 01:51, walt skrev:
>    
>> On 07/15/2010 02:15 AM, Erik wrote:
>>
>>      
>>> ...This is the
>>> new Dell vostro|1720 from November, that replaced the old INSPIRON|8600
>>> aquired 5 years earlier...
>>>        
>> I feel as if I'm reading a post that I selected at random from the
>> middle of a long thread with lots of previous questions and answers
>> that I can't see.
>>
>> I've never heard of either of those products.  Maybe someone else
>> knows what
>> they are?
>>      
>
> Do not worry about not knowing about the products that I mentioned in
> the parenthesis in the last paragraph (they are just some laptops with
> differend graphic cards built in). You may know enough to help if you
> are familiar with Xorg, in particular the driver called NV (as the first
> 2 lines of my post shows). Do you for example know from where the driver
> gets the bogus physical display size 508 x 317 from, and why it insists
> on using it instead of the configured size?
>    

Are you using hal?  If so, you may need to get or change the config 
files so that it will run at the settings you want instead of what it 
"detects".

By the way, I have no idea how to edit them.  It's in xml.  You may can 
google and borrow their config file tho.

If you are not using hal, it should be set in xorg.conf.  I don't use 
hal and that is where mine is set.

Hope that gives you a couple ideas.

Dale

:-)  :-)

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: (II) NV(0): Setting screen physical size to 508 x 317

[Erik]

2010-07-16 08:13, Dale skrev:
> Erik wrote:
>> 2010-07-16 01:51, walt skrev:
>>   
>>> On 07/15/2010 02:15 AM, Erik wrote:
>>>
>>>     
>>>> ...This is the
>>>> new Dell vostro|1720 from November, that replaced the old
>>>> INSPIRON|8600
>>>> aquired 5 years earlier...
>>>>        
>>> I feel as if I'm reading a post that I selected at random from the
>>> middle of a long thread with lots of previous questions and answers
>>> that I can't see.
>>>
>>> I've never heard of either of those products.  Maybe someone else
>>> knows what
>>> they are?
>>>      
>>
>> Do not worry about not knowing about the products that I mentioned in
>> the parenthesis in the last paragraph (they are just some laptops with
>> differend graphic cards built in). You may know enough to help if you
>> are familiar with Xorg, in particular the driver called NV (as the first
>> 2 lines of my post shows). Do you for example know from where the driver
>> gets the bogus physical display size 508 x 317 from, and why it insists
>> on using it instead of the configured size?
>>    
>
> Are you using hal?  If so, you may need to get or change the config
> files so that it will run at the settings you want instead of what it
> "detects".
>
> By the way, I have no idea how to edit them.  It's in xml.  You may
> can google and borrow their config file tho.
>
> If you are not using hal, it should be set in xorg.conf.  I don't use
> hal and that is where mine is set.

Yes I am using hal. Maybe that is the problem. But it is clear from the
log file that xorg.conf is read anyway.

[gentoo-user] get-edid?

[Erik]

I installed app-misc/read-edid-1.4.2. It is supposed to install 2 tools;
get-edid and parse-edid. But I only got parse-edid. So I can not use it.
Any help?

Re: [gentoo-user] get-edid?

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 673 bytes --]

On Fri, 16 Jul 2010 08:59:52 +0200, Erik wrote:

> I installed app-misc/read-edid-1.4.2. It is supposed to install 2 tools;
> get-edid and parse-edid. But I only got parse-edid. So I can not use it.

% qlist read-edid
/usr/sbin/get-edid
/usr/share/man/man1/get-edid.1.bz2
/usr/share/man/man1/parse-edid.1.bz2
/usr/share/doc/read-edid-2.0.0-r1/NEWS.bz2
/usr/share/doc/read-edid-2.0.0-r1/README.bz2
/usr/share/doc/read-edid-2.0.0-r1/AUTHORS.bz2
/usr/share/doc/read-edid-2.0.0-r1/ChangeLog.bz2
/usr/bin/parse-edid

Both are there but note that get-edid is in /usr/sbin so only in root's
path.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Ask a silly person, get a silly answer

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

Re: [gentoo-user] get-edid?

[Erik]

2010-07-16 09:22, Neil Bothwick skrev:
> On Fri, 16 Jul 2010 08:59:52 +0200, Erik wrote:
>
>> I installed app-misc/read-edid-1.4.2. It is supposed to install 2 tools;
>> get-edid and parse-edid. But I only got parse-edid. So I can not use it.
>
> % qlist read-edid
> /usr/sbin/get-edid
> /usr/share/man/man1/get-edid.1.bz2
> /usr/share/man/man1/parse-edid.1.bz2
> /usr/share/doc/read-edid-2.0.0-r1/NEWS.bz2
> /usr/share/doc/read-edid-2.0.0-r1/README.bz2
> /usr/share/doc/read-edid-2.0.0-r1/AUTHORS.bz2
> /usr/share/doc/read-edid-2.0.0-r1/ChangeLog.bz2
> /usr/bin/parse-edid
>
> Both are there but note that get-edid is in /usr/sbin so only in root's
> path.

Thanks for the help. So version 2.0 has both binaries, but in different
places.

This is what it looks like for the stable version (1.4.2):
% qlist read-edid
/usr/share/man/man1/get-edid.1.lzma
/usr/share/man/man1/parse-edid.1.lzma
/usr/share/doc/read-edid-1.4.2/AUTHORS.lzma
/usr/share/doc/read-edid-1.4.2/README.lzma
/usr/share/doc/read-edid-1.4.2/ChangeLog.lzma
/usr/share/doc/read-edid-1.4.2/NEWS.lzma
/usr/sbin/parse-edid
/usr/lib/debug/usr/sbin/parse-edid.debug


So actually the stable version fails to install get-edid.

(I also had a problem with bash not finding the parse-edid binary after
upgrading to 2.0, since then /usr/sbin/parse-edid was removed and
/usr/bin/parse-edid was added without bash knowing about it. Ctrl+D and
starting the shell again fixed it though.)

Now to the actual result:

/usr/sbin/get-edid: get-edid version 2.0.0

        Performing real mode VBE call
        Interrupt 0x10 ax=0x4f00 bx=0x0 cx=0x0
        Function supported
        Call successful

        VBE version 300
        VBE string at 0x11100 "NVIDIA"

VBE/DDC service about to be called
        Report DDC capabilities

        Performing real mode VBE call
        Interrupt 0x10 ax=0x4f15 bx=0x0 cx=0x0
        Function supported
        Call successful

        Monitor and video card combination does not support DDC1 transfers
        Monitor and video card combination does not support DDC2 transfers
        0 seconds per 128 byte EDID block transfer
        Screen is not blanked during DDC transfer

Reading next EDID block

VBE/DDC service about to be called
        Read EDID

        Performing real mode VBE call
        Interrupt 0x10 ax=0x4f15 bx=0x1 cx=0x0
        Function supported
        Call failed

The EDID data should not be trusted as the VBE call failed
Error: output block unchanged


Any idea why it fails? Is that why xorg can not read the display size either? If so, why does it just pick a random display size without reporting the error?

[gentoo-user] Re: (II) NV(0): Setting screen physical size to 508 x 317

[walt]

On 07/15/2010 11:03 PM, Erik wrote:
> 2010-07-16 01:51, walt skrev:
>> On 07/15/2010 02:15 AM, Erik wrote:
>>
>>> ...This is the
>>> new Dell vostro|1720 from November, that replaced the old INSPIRON|8600
>>> aquired 5 years earlier...
>>
>> I feel as if I'm reading a post that I selected at random from the
>> middle of a long thread with lots of previous questions and answers
>> that I can't see.
>>
>> I've never heard of either of those products.  Maybe someone else
>> knows what they are?


> Do not worry about not knowing about the products that I mentioned in
> the parenthesis in the last paragraph (they are just some laptops with
> differend graphic cards built in).

Ah, I understand now.  I was expecting the information to be relevant.

> You may know enough to help if you
> are familiar with Xorg, in particular the driver called NV (as the first
> 2 lines of my post shows)...

I know a little about it.  It is no longer maintained by xorg or nvidia, so
that may be part of the problem if you are using recent nvidia hardware.

A commonly asked question is "does it work as expected with the vesa driver?"
(Vesa does not include 2D/3D acceleration, obviously, but it should at least
give you correct results for an ordinary console.)

The open-source 'nv' driver has been replaced by the open-source 'nouveau'
driver, which is still very much a work in progress.  I'm using it just to
experiment -- I don't need 2D/3D acceleration, but maybe you do.  If so, you
need to use nvidia's proprietary 'nvidia' driver because it's the only choice
you have at present.

All of the drivers I mentioned are in gentoo portage in the xf86-video-* series.

"nouveau" suppport in the kernel needs a bit of annoying fiddling with the
kernel config file to get it right.  I can help with that if you want to try
it.

[gentoo-user] [SOLVED] (II) NV(0): Setting screen physical size to 508 x 317

[Erik]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1183 bytes --]

2010-07-17 01:54, walt skrev:
> On 07/15/2010 11:03 PM, Erik wrote:
>> You may know enough to help if you are familiar with Xorg, in 
>> particular the driver called NV
>
> I know a little about it.  It is no longer maintained by xorg or 
> nvidia, so
> that may be part of the problem if you are using recent nvidia hardware.
>
> A commonly asked question is "does it work as expected with the vesa 
> driver?"
> (Vesa does not include 2D/3D acceleration, obviously, but it should at 
> least
> give you correct results for an ordinary console.)
>
> The open-source 'nv' driver has been replaced by the open-source 
> 'nouveau'
> driver, which is still very much a work in progress.  I'm using it 
> just to
> experiment -- I don't need 2D/3D acceleration, but maybe you do.  If 
> so, you
> need to use nvidia's proprietary 'nvidia' driver because it's the only 
> choice
> you have at present.

Now I finally have 'nouveau' sort of working. The hardest part so far 
was probably learning the spelling of it.

Unfortunately some icons are corrupted in the taskbar of the panel (see 
attached screenshot) and Alt+Tab window. I tried all versions of 
xf86-video-nouveau in portage.


[-- Attachment #2: xf86-video-nouveau-0.0.16_pre20101010.png --]
[-- Type: image/png, Size: 29627 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] (II) NV(0): Setting screen physical size to 508 x 317

[Robert Bridge]

On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 10:15 AM, Erik <esigra@gmail.com> wrote:
> (There are other issues with this video device; it shows only 25 × 80
> characters in the virtual terminals (should be 75 × 240). This is the
> new Dell vostro|1720 from November, that replaced the old INSPIRON|8600
> aquired 5 years earlier, with radeon driver. That old device worked fine
> without any configuration files. The physical screen size was detected
> and the virtual kernel output switched to 75 × 240 characters as soon as
> the device was detected.)

Hi Erik,

It would help if you actually told us which driver you are using, and
what the actual hardware is. I'm guessing it's an nVidia card in the
new laptop, and some form of ATI card in the old one. It sounds like
the driver is over-riding the xorg.conf with (incorrect) readings it's
getting from the EDID for the display.

Cheers,
RobbieAB.

Re: [gentoo-user] (II) NV(0): Setting screen physical size to 508 x 317

[Erik]

2010-07-16 09:49, Robert Bridge skrev:
> On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 10:15 AM, Erik <esigra@gmail.com> wrote:
>   
>> (There are other issues with this video device; it shows only 25 × 80
>> characters in the virtual terminals (should be 75 × 240). This is the
>> new Dell vostro|1720 from November, that replaced the old INSPIRON|8600
>> aquired 5 years earlier, with radeon driver. That old device worked fine
>> without any configuration files. The physical screen size was detected
>> and the virtual kernel output switched to 75 × 240 characters as soon as
>> the device was detected.)
>>     
> Hi Erik,
>
> It would help if you actually told us which driver you are using, and
> what the actual hardware is. I'm guessing it's an nVidia card in the
> new laptop, and some form of ATI card in the old one. It sounds like
> the driver is over-riding the xorg.conf with (incorrect) readings it's
> getting from the EDID for the display.
>   

My /etc/make.conf has VIDEO_CARDS="nv" but I thought it was obvious from
the "NV" in the log message. The actual hardware is reported by lspci as
"01:00.0 VGA compatible controller: nVidia Corporation G96 [GeForce
9600M GS] (rev a1)". I tried to use read-edid see what EDID shows, but
the call failed (see other message). How would I know if xorg tried to
read EDID and whether it worked?

Re: [gentoo-user] (II) NV(0): Setting screen physical size to 508 x 317

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 732 bytes --]

On Fri, 16 Jul 2010 10:14:34 +0200, Erik wrote:

> My /etc/make.conf has VIDEO_CARDS="nv" but I thought it was obvious from
> the "NV" in the log message. The actual hardware is reported by lspci as
> "01:00.0 VGA compatible controller: nVidia Corporation G96 [GeForce
> 9600M GS] (rev a1)". I tried to use read-edid see what EDID shows, but
> the call failed (see other message). How would I know if xorg tried to
> read EDID and whether it worked?

It should appear in the log file. The nvidia driver has UseEdid and
UseEdidDpi options that you could set to False to have it ignore the EDID
information, I don't know if nv has equivalent options.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

I get enough exercise just pushing my luck.

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

[gentoo-user] Re: (II) NV(0): Setting screen physical size to 508 x 317

[walt]

On 07/16/2010 01:14 AM, Erik wrote:
> ...The actual hardware is reported by lspci as
> "01:00.0 VGA compatible controller: nVidia Corporation G96 [GeForce
> 9600M GS] (rev a1)".

That seems to be very new hardware.

I'm using xf86-video-nouveau-0.0.16_pre20100615, and in my /var/log/Xorg.0.log
I see:

(II) NOUVEAU driver for NVIDIA chipset families :
         RIVA TNT    (NV04)
         RIVA TNT2   (NV05)
         GeForce 256 (NV10)
         GeForce 2   (NV11, NV15)
         GeForce 4MX (NV17, NV18)
         GeForce 3   (NV20)
         GeForce 4Ti (NV25, NV28)
         GeForce FX  (NV3x)
         GeForce 6   (NV4x)
         GeForce 7   (G7x)
         GeForce 8   (G8x)                 <------ oops! stops at GF8
(II) Primary Device is: PCI 01@00:00:0