re: Radeon HD 5450?

[matthew green <mrg%eterna.com.au@localhost>]

Phil Nelson writes:
> On Wed, 11 May 2022 11:15:42 +1000
> matthew green <mrg%eterna.com.au@localhost> wrote:
>
> > do you have anything else handy to test?  gpus are crazy stupid
> > prices these days :-(
>
> Hi Matthew,
>
>   My department has several nvidia around and I have not yet found
> one that works to the point of getting X running.  I've tried
> the following:
>
>    MSI GEFORCE GTX 1060
>    GIGABYTE GEFORCE GTX 1650
>    EVGA GEFORCE GTX 1018Ti (not enough power)
>    An older Radeon I had sitting around, not sure which one but
>     it blew up in the same place as the 5450 ... not mapping
>     the BIOS.
>    The video chip on the motherboard ... it finds it as
>     acpivga0 with acpiout0 to acpiout7.  It finds a genfb0
>     and labels it "Intel Rocket Lake UHD Graphics 750 (32EU) (rev. 0x04)
>     It then reports drm at genfb0 not configured.  I do get a
>     working wscons with 4 screens.  "X -configure" quits with
>     an error saying that the number of created screens does not
>     match number of detected devices.  In the Xorg.0.log when
>     it probes for the Intel integrated Graphics Chipsets it
>     doesn't list the 750 and it doesn't match it.
>     I don't have heavy gpu requirements so if I could get the
>     intel UHD graphics working, that would be good.
>
>   You said you have a working nouveau 730.  I'll see if I can
> acquire one of those to try.  Any specific card you recommend?

i have asus 730 and asus 1030 silent cards both working for me
in my two main desktop systems now.  the 730 did once assert(3)
in libdrm_nouveau and X exited, and the 1030 has one had some
minor display damage (green dots over the root window, likely
generated by my green-on-black terminal, but cleared by simply
moving a window over that space), and it's only been a couple
of weeks using the 730, and few days for 1030.

i don't have anything newer/better due to prices, and also cuz
the above are more than sufficient for my needs.

it's possible that back porting the rocket lake code wouldn't
be too difficult -- that was true a few years back when i did
this for kabylake when skylake was already supported... quick
peek says that RKL appeared right after our drm, sometime between
linux 5.6 and 5.10, and unfortunately, this struct:

static const struct intel_device_info rkl_info = {

in the new code has a couple of new members inside struct
intel_device_info{} than our code, so the back port would need
to consider these parts too.


.mrg.