Bug 185286
| Summary: | glxinfo erroneously reports "direct rendering: No" | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Joachim Frieben <jfrieben> | ||||||||
| Component: | mesa | Assignee: | Adam Jackson <ajax> | ||||||||
| Status: | CLOSED RAWHIDE | QA Contact: | X/OpenGL Maintenance List <xgl-maint> | ||||||||
| Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |||||||||
| Priority: | medium | ||||||||||
| Version: | rawhide | ||||||||||
| Target Milestone: | --- | ||||||||||
| Target Release: | --- | ||||||||||
| Hardware: | All | ||||||||||
| OS: | Linux | ||||||||||
| Whiteboard: | |||||||||||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |||||||||
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |||||||||
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||||||||||
| Last Closed: | 2006-03-24 10:37:06 UTC | Type: | --- | ||||||||
| Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- | ||||||||
| Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |||||||||
| Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |||||||||
| oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |||||||||
| Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |||||||||
| Embargoed: | |||||||||||
| Attachments: |
|
||||||||||
|
Description
Joachim Frieben
2006-03-13 09:26:46 UTC
Created attachment 126026 [details]
Xorg.0.log for SuperSavage IX/C w/DRI enabled
Created attachment 126027 [details]
glxinfo output for SuperSavage IX/C w/DRI enabled
Please attach the output of: LIBGL_DEBUG=verbose glxinfo if it's different than the output attached above. If there's no additional output when LIBGL_DEBUG=verbose, please attach the output of ldd `which glxinfo` As stated above, the output of glxinfo is identical in both cases. This is already surprising as there used to be some (useless) complaint about missing "drirc" files which is now absent. Maybe M. Harris rendered the GL libs more quiet in the latest builds ... possibly a bit too quiet. 'which glxinfo' returns: /usr/bin/glxinfo The "ldd" output is attached. Created attachment 126046 [details]
ldd output of /usr/bin/glxinfo for SuperSavage IX/C w/DRI enabled
I have obtained the following benchmark results for "glxgears" for a default windows size of 300x300 pixels: 24 bpp: 90 fps w/ DRI, 145 fps w/o DRI 16 bpp: 215 fps w/ DRI, 215 fps w/o DRI Right now, "glxgears" reports frame rates with enabled "DRI" that are at best on par with "DRI" disabled and even significantly inferior at 24 bpp. This looks sort of pathological. (In reply to comment #4) > As stated above, the output of glxinfo is identical in both cases. This > is already surprising as there used to be some (useless) complaint about > missing "drirc" files which is now absent. Maybe M. Harris rendered the > GL libs more quiet in the latest builds ... possibly a bit too quiet. I haven't rendered anything "more quiet". The src.rpm is publically downloadable, so there's no need to guess. The most common reason for DRI not working as expected in this manner, is having multiple libGL's installed, and getting the wrong one. This often happens if you manually build Mesa or use downloadable prebuilt tarball binaries, etc. If the X server log indicates DRI is enabled, and glxinfo indicates DRI is not being used, and you are executing the glxinfo binary at a shell which is on the same local machine as the X server which is managing the display you are viewing, that usually indicates a libGL mismatch as mentioned above. At this point, I'd strongly recommend discussing the problem on the DRI mailing lists. On a side note, the (2D) savage driver you're using seems to be rather chatty, and seems to be spewing a lot of debug info. If that's our driver, it's the stock X.Org driver, and should probably also be reported to upstream X.Org bugzilla at http://bugs.freedesktop.org HTH This is a clean install from the Fedora development tree carried out on **2006-03-14** with a couple of available updates over the last 2 days. No, no external add-ons (I haven't heard about propietary "savage driver packages yet). The "savage" driver package is the original Fedora one (xorg-x11-drv-savage-2.0.2.3-1.2) and it is *identical* to that of FC5T3 for which "glxinfo" behaved absolutely *normally*. I even reinstalled FC5T3 after my initial report to explicitly verify this issue. The system is an IBM ThinkPad T23 connected to an external LG 1710B monitor, and I am sitting in front of it, *no* remote session to a dumb "X" terminal (sigh!). The "Mesa" packages differ however: "mesa-libGL-6.4.2-2.1" vs "mesa-libGL-6.4.2-6". The kernel is different, too. I further verified for a current Ubuntu live CD. Here the issue is absent (modular "Xorg", etc.) Btw, there is still a pending report for bug #180150 caused by M. Harris' RV100 bus master patch which broke "DRI" for my Radeon R100 QD PCI It's too easy a solution to direct people upstream when it's not even clear whether the issue hasn't been introduced at the vendor level. I understand that M. Harris may be tired of dealing with false bug reports. There have been some comments on "fedora-devel" which indicate this. However, this attitude is not acceptable from the point of view of the individual tester who spends a significant amount of time and energy to help make Fedora as bug-free as possible. It's not an "SElinux" issue either (see my report for bug #176221), as I booted with "enforcing=0" to rule out this type of problem in the first place. Fixed in rawhide. |