-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Hello,

On Nov 24, 2007, at 07:13, Pavel Cahyna wrote:

> On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 09:13:09AM -0500, Michael Lorenz wrote:
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> On Nov 23, 2007, at 03:47, Pavel Cahyna wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, Nov 22, 2007 at 05:55:01PM -0500, Michael Lorenz wrote:
>>>> With PCI graphics cards it's more complicated. Cards based on  
>>>> ATI Mach64
>>>> chips
>>>> should work as long as they use a Rage II or Rage Pro ( also  
>>>> used on U5/U10
>>>> and
>>>> a few other mainboards ). Cards based on Rage XL chips are  
>>>> untested but
>>>> should
>>>> work, I have a Rage XL but with PC firmware so it's not very  
>>>> useful here.
>>>
>>> When I have tried machfb with a Rage XL card last time, it  
>>> crashed during
>>> boot. That was on alpha and the card works fine with XFree86.
>>
>> Machfb attaches but misdetects a whole bunch of things ( like  
>> memory size ) -
>> kind of similar to machfb attaching to a Rage 128 ( the XL has a  
>> 64MB aperture,
>> unlike older mach64 which use only 16MB ) - I wonder if the XL is  
>> some sort of
>> unholy bastard between the two. Guess I should read more driver  
>> source to see
>> where they special-case the XL.
>
> the panic message is:
> machfb0 at pci0 dev 9 function 0: ATI Technologies Rage XL (rev. 0x27)
> panic

Please mail me the card's pcictl dump output.
Is your alpha somehow limited in how much PCI memory it can map? I've  
seen my SS20 run out of page entries with too many SBus graphics boards.

have fun
Michael
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (Darwin)

iQEVAwUBR0g7WspnzkX8Yg2nAQIP7gf/SpmyFcw2IG6pHG2ODqncU/pxKFWe6Zi5
Q2PxSlNO9l/Wl53rYXXsX0oPAfUqqFMEWd4mg3WnmF2ZUmrRIqgeKkVocKwi46MQ
doPZvEugnW0xj6EBGscZ4+Bmpd1iVvt+2XXVOzLg56XQZHPlFlTiBfIsoEUPpZvF
2fHYgMLQFs8E3Ydjv+5/y54KyDIkzxLGbENnI5nQ7axfJ/TlNDW/OXImzTGT3Os0
WkhkpNyZgPpjGBEO1VDu+jiAQYDb+Iql3DwfVR9y0y36KmUSWJ+pPa4xvBj8LuHe
cTOTxSW59T4gEEkmZa4PeU9wUQhOikqwuCCv4fsaIVkX2RH7ci8HzQ==
=4cy+
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----