Red Hat Bugzilla – Bug 442738
sr# 1796308 - Mesa/ libGL warning: 3D driver claims to not support visual 0x5b
Last modified: 2018-10-27 08:57:05 EDT
Description of problem: Users are encountering problems using IDL software - they encounter a message "libGL warning: 3D driver claims to not support visual 0x5b", and the application segfaults. The issue of segfaulting was traced to the application. With the attached patch, software runs 8-10% faster. How reproducible: n/a Steps to Reproduce: n/a Actual results: n/a Expected results: n/a Additional info: upstream bug - https://bugs.freed esktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=6689 **** Problem Description Source : Service Request 1796308 Created by : UCLMSSL Created on : 13-Feb-2008 07:10:40 It does help. >> http://www.ittv is.com/services/techtip.asp?ttid=4177 Grr, substandard proprietary packages... (IDL I mean) I'll do what I can to get licensing updated for IDL 6.4 or later. >> Your updated packages do work and work significantly faster for 3D programs. >* If i understand this corectly, with the _TEST_ package performace is >> significantly faster over the package provided with RHEL5 ? Yes. The speedup is about 8-10% >> It would still be worthwhile updating to 6.5.2... >* This would need a good amount of work from QA. We tend to backport security >> fixes, and enhancements as requested to minimize any disruptive changes. I'm aware of that. It's one of those cases of most of the changes being bugfixes and the feature changes being useful (DRI working for various chipsets) with no apparent major changes and no symbol changes. http://www.mesa3d.org/reln otes-6.5.2.html 6.5.3 contains a few more bugfixes... http://www.mesa3d.org/reln otes-6.5.3.html If the preferred method is a backport then that's fine. >> Setting LIBGL_ALWAYS_INDIRECT solves the problem on affected systems. >* This switch enables software rendering, and will should be slower than hardware based redering. I'm painfully aware of that (approx 1/3 the speed of hardware rendering) but it's better than segfaulting... Note from alanm: Just so that we know where the patch came from; this patch is not from Mesa-6.5.3 but is in Mesa-7.0.2.
Created attachment 302614 [details] patch to glext.c
Created attachment 302615 [details] sosreport
This request was evaluated by Red Hat Product Management for inclusion in a Red Hat Enterprise Linux maintenance release. Product Management has requested further review of this request by Red Hat Engineering, for potential inclusion in a Red Hat Enterprise Linux Update release for currently deployed products. This request is not yet committed for inclusion in an Update release.
That patch just hides the warning message. Which is certainly the correct thing to do, but it won't solve the segfault they're seeing. Are we trying to fix that here too?
As far as I can tell, just the message. The segfaulting problem is in the application code and its proprietary.
as per the customer, apparently hiding the message boosts the performance of proprietary application by upto 40%. beats me.
This request was evaluated by Red Hat Product Management for inclusion, but this component is not scheduled to be updated in the current Red Hat Enterprise Linux release. If you would like this request to be reviewed for the next minor release, ask your support representative to set the next rhel-x.y flag to "?".
Moving again to 5.5
This request was evaluated by Red Hat Product Management for inclusion in the current release of Red Hat Enterprise Linux. Because the affected component is not scheduled to be updated in the current release, Red Hat is unfortunately unable to address this request at this time. Red Hat invites you to ask your support representative to propose this request, if appropriate and relevant, in the next release of Red Hat Enterprise Linux.
devel ack, trivial
cannot reproduce on this graphics.. is this the right one? is it possible this bug has been fixed already? 0000:0a:00.0 VGA compatible controller [0300]: nVidia Corporation NV44 [GeForce 6200 TurboCache(TM)] [10de:0161] (rev a1) (prog-if 00 [VGA controller]) Subsystem: nVidia Corporation Device [10de:025e] Control: I/O+ Mem+ BusMaster+ SpecCycle- MemWINV- VGASnoop- ParErr- Stepping- SERR- FastB2B- DisINTx- Status: Cap+ 66MHz- UDF- FastB2B- ParErr- DEVSEL=fast >TAbort- <TAbort- <MAbort- >SERR- <PERR- INTx- Latency: 0, Cache Line Size: 64 bytes Interrupt: pin A routed to IRQ 5 Region 0: Memory at f0000000 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=16M] Region 1: Memory at d0000000 (64-bit, prefetchable) [size=256M] Region 3: Memory at f1000000 (64-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=16M] Expansion ROM at <unassigned> [disabled] Capabilities: [60] Power Management version 2 Flags: PMEClk- DSI- D1- D2- AuxCurrent=0mA PME(D0-,D1-,D2-,D3hot-,D3cold-) Status: D0 NoSoftRst- PME-Enable- DSel=0 DScale=0 PME- Capabilities: [68] MSI: Enable- Count=1/1 Maskable- 64bit+ Address: 0000000000000000 Data: 0000 Capabilities: [78] Express (v1) Endpoint, MSI 00 DevCap: MaxPayload 128 bytes, PhantFunc 0, Latency L0s <512ns, L1 <4us ExtTag- AttnBtn- AttnInd- PwrInd- RBE- FLReset- DevCtl: Report errors: Correctable- Non-Fatal- Fatal- Unsupported- RlxdOrd+ ExtTag- PhantFunc- AuxPwr- NoSnoop+ MaxPayload 128 bytes, MaxReadReq 512 bytes DevSta: CorrErr- UncorrErr+ FatalErr- UnsuppReq+ AuxPwr- TransPend- LnkCap: Port #0, Speed 2.5GT/s, Width x16, ASPM L0s L1, Latency L0 <1us, L1 <4us ClockPM- Surprise- LLActRep- BwNot- LnkCtl: ASPM Disabled; RCB 128 bytes Disabled- Retrain- CommClk- ExtSynch- ClockPM- AutWidDis- BWInt- AutBWInt- LnkSta: Speed 2.5GT/s, Width x16, TrErr- Train- SlotClk- DLActive- BWMgmt- ABWMgmt- Kernel modules: nvidiafb
Can we get the QA ack on this. Mesa has not been on the ACL since 5.3 and we need to get this bug closed out considering how old this is and that we do actually have a patch proposed for this.
I haven't seen it on NV hardware. The last time I saw this was on a laptop sometime ago with Intel graphics.
3793900 build (dist-5E-qu-candidate, /cvs/dist:rpms/mesa/RHEL-5:mesa-6_5_1-7_10_el5) completed successfully MODIFIED
Since the problem described in this bug report should be resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a resolution of ERRATA. For information on the advisory, and where to find the updated files, follow the link below. If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report. http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2012-0288.html