Bug 20340

Summary:	agpgart resource allocation problem
Product:	[Retired] Red Hat Linux	Reporter:	Ed McKenzie <eem12>
Component:	kernel	Assignee:	Michael K. Johnson <johnsonm>
Status:	CLOSED RAWHIDE	QA Contact:	Brock Organ <borgan>
Severity:	medium	Docs Contact:
Priority:	medium
Version:	7.1
Target Milestone:	---
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	i386
OS:	Linux
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	Bug Fix
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2001-02-22 00:48:59 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:

Description Ed McKenzie 2000-11-04 19:42:13 UTC

Loading agpgart works the first time, but unloading and reloading it
results in the kernel finding the AGP aperture at 0x0. Obviously, starting
X with DRI after that leads to a hard freeze.

VIA MVP3 chipset, K6-2/400, Matrox G200 AGP, default RedHat 7.0 kernel. I
should add that I've yet to try a kernel (RH 2.2.14, stock 2.4.x-test,
etc.) that doesn't crash in this manner on my system.

I've filed bugs for this on dri.sourceforge.net as well as e-mails to lkml
and the agpgart maintainer, but to no avail. I suppose this isn't really an
interesting problem? The suggested fix seems to be to compile agpgart
static and be done with it, but that seems to me like a rather silly
solution.

Comment 1 Ed McKenzie 2001-02-21 21:36:24 UTC

This bug is still present in Fisher. Obviously, the issue persists in 2.4 

kernels.



I think this could potentially be a problem for machines that boot in text by 

default and only use X occasionally -- agpgart would be removed after 

being unused for a period, and the next startx would lock the machine 

solid. I run gdm by default, so this is just idle speculation, but it's my 

feeling that this should be fixed.

Comment 2 Michael K. Johnson 2001-02-22 00:27:09 UTC

Well, it could at least default to not being unloaded automatically...

Comment 3 Alan Cox 2001-02-22 00:41:06 UTC

This problem should not been seen in recent -ac kernels

Comment 4 Michael K. Johnson 2001-02-22 00:48:55 UTC

Ah, in that case, please upgrade to our latest beta kernel when it
is available (2.4.1-0.1.9 or later) and let us know whether or not
it fixes the problem.  Thanks!

Comment 5 Ed McKenzie 2001-03-15 17:27:38 UTC

Fixed in 2.4.2-0.1.25 (and also in 2.4.2-ac19.)