Ubuntu
xserver-xorg-video-ati package

X fails to start in dapper, edgy with ati X600/X700/X800 (control not delegated to "radeon" driver, "ati" complains about Mach64).

Bug #28925 reported by Philippe Joyez
208
This bug affects 1 person
Affects Status Importance Assigned to Milestone
xserver-xorg-driver-ati
Fix Released
High
xserver-xorg-video-ati (Ubuntu)
Fix Released
High
Ubuntu-X

Bug Description

When running dapper flight3 liveCD on my dell 9100 with an ATI radeon X600, I get a "Failed to start the X server" the reason being apparently "no device detected". However, the card seems correctly identified in the xorg log file, with the "ati" driver selected.

There is also another error in the xorg log file about GLcore failing to load.

I can provide more details and I'am willing to perform tests if needed.
Keep on the good job!

Tags: ati xorg
Revision history for this message
Daniel Stone (daniels) wrote :

does changing the driver from 'ati' to 'radeon' help?

Revision history for this message
Philippe Joyez (ubuntu-5-pjoyez) wrote :

Yes X starts OK if I use the radeon driver. But DRI is disabled and nothing at all works in Gnome: When I try to select a menu item, I get the watch and the tab "starting xxx" (where xxx is the application I try to launch), but then it goes away without any message. The log out screen does not come up...

If I use the vesa driver things work, except I have no network and other problems (see other issues I filled).

Revision history for this message
Philippe Joyez (ubuntu-5-pjoyez) wrote : Re: [Bug 28925] X fails to start in dapper flight3 on a dell 9100 with (ubuntu: message 4 of 10) ati X600

Daniel Stone - <email address hidden> a écrit :

>Public bug report changed:
>https://launchpad.net/malone/bugs/28925
>
>Comment:
>does changing the driver from 'ati' to 'radeon' help?
>
>
>
>
Daniel,

In reply to your question I posted an extra comment to my report a few
days ago, but as you are not in the subsriber list to this bug I now
send you directly the answer to your question (just in case).

Yes X starts OK if I use the radeon driver. But then DRI is disabled and
nothing at all works in Gnome: When I try to select a menu item, I get
the watch and the tab "starting xxx" (where xxx is the application I try
to launch), but then it goes away without any message. The log out
screen does not come up...

If I use the vesa driver things work, except I have no network and other
problems (see other issues I filled).

Revision history for this message
Philippe Joyez (ubuntu-5-pjoyez) wrote : Re: X fails to start in dapper flight3 on a dell 9100 with ati X600

Same problem with flight4 liveCD.

The card has chip model RV370 5B62.
I reproduced the problem on two different systems having the same video card.
Other people seem to experience the same problem with the same or other X600 card. See http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=126278

Revision history for this message
Joel Rosdahl (jrosdahl) wrote : Re: X fails to start in dapper flight3 & 4 with ati X600

I can confirm that the problem exists in the AMD64 install CD for dapper flight 4. I also have a Dell Dimension 9150 with an ATI Radeon X600.

Sebastien Bacher (seb128)
Changed in xserver-xorg-driver-ati:
assignee: nobody → ubuntu-x-swat
Revision history for this message
gheeke (gerhard-heeke) wrote :

The Problem (no device detected) also exists on a DELL GX620 with ATI RV370 5B62 [Radeon X600 PCIE]. Monitor is a Eizo L367 TFT via DVI.

xserver-xorg-driver-ati is 6.5.7.3-0ubuntu4
xserver-xorg-core is 1.0.2-0ubuntu3

Revision history for this message
Jerome S. Gotangco (jsgotangco) wrote :

Can you confirm this to recur with the latest Flight 6 release?

Changed in xserver-xorg-driver-ati:
status: Unconfirmed → Needs Info
Revision history for this message
Susan Cragin (susancragin) wrote :

other possibly related bugs:
bug 37519
bug 32368
bug 35066

Revision history for this message
Markus (barock-deactivatedaccount) wrote :

I can report that starting x from flight 6 works on a Dell Latitude D810 with ATI X600 128 MB RADEON graphics card.

However I get the following error when checking if there is support for direct rendering:

Unknown device ID 3150, please report. Assuming plain R300.
*********************************WARN_ONCE*********************************
File r300_state.c function r300Enable line 456
TODO - double side stencil !
***************************************************************************
No ctx->FragmentProgram._Current!!
direct rendering: Yes

Revision history for this message
gheeke (gerhard-heeke) wrote :

Just tested it. The Problem still exists with Dapper Flight 6 (Live CD)

no devices detected. Fatal server error: no screens found

(DELL GX620 with ATI RV370 5B62 [Radeon X600 PCIE])

Revision history for this message
Elia Vecellio (eliavecellio) wrote : Re: X fails to start in Dapper 6 with ati radeon X800XL (also in Breezy 5.10)

I had this same problem when using an Install CD with Breezy, but resolved it by editing the xorg.conf to use the 'radeon' driver instead of 'ati' driver.

However, with the LiveCD of Dapper 6, when I change the xorg.conf file to use the 'correct' driver, the changes are (obviously) not maintained for the reboot. Is there some special option command one can specify on the LiveCD to choose which video driver.

This is a big bad problem for ATI owners.... makes trying Ubuntu a fairly scary experience!

Revision history for this message
Michaël Perrin (sweedymick) wrote : Re: X fails to start in dapper flight3 & 4 with ati X600

Now my X600 (SE) mobility graphic card works without any configuration in Dapper Flight 6 (maybe this is because I configure my network during the installation, I don't know). That's really good, but that's strange that for other people there are still some problems.

Revision history for this message
Florian Pflug (fgp) wrote :

I can confirm this bug too on an Dell Optiplex GX620.
The installer used driver "ati" in the xorg.conf file, but AFAIK
this driver only supports mach64-cards, and maybe some other
older cards. Changing this to "radeon" instead gave me a running
X, altough without DRI.

Installling the fglrx packages worked, and DRI was supported afterwards -
but the ati-driver seems to be rather unstable on this machine - probably
because of problems with the vesa framebuffer driver used for the console.
I cannot disable this driver, however, because then I get no picture
on my (dvi-connected) LCD screen during the ubuntu boot (Incompatible resolution..).

According to the 2.6.16 changelog, drm should work with 2.6.16 + radeon x600.
Apparently the only thing missing in the correct PCI id in the radeon driver, to make
it detect the x600 card. I'm currently bulding a custom 2.6.15 kernel with that pci-id
included.

It would be nice if this (rather trivial) patch could be backported into the next
ubuntu 2.6.15 kernel.

Revision history for this message
Florian Pflug (fgp) wrote :

I just found out that the PCI-id added in 2.6.16 is apparently the wrong one.
My ATI Radeon X600 in an Dell Optiplex GX620 has
vendor id: 0x1002
device id: 0x5B62

I'll report if adding this pci-id helped...

Revision history for this message
Florian Pflug (fgp) wrote :

Hi

Adding (0x1002:0x5B62) to radeon_PCI_IDS makes the radeon kernel module
recognize my card. OpenGL acceleration basically works in X then, but it's
no less unstable then when using the ati proprietary drivers. So it's not useable
for me, but maybe someone else has more luck...

Anyway, please add this pci-id to ubuntu stock kernels.

Revision history for this message
In , Timo Jyrinki (timo-jyrinki-hut) wrote :
Download full text (4.5 KiB)

Running Ubuntu dapper, with the latest CVS version of
http://webcvs.freedesktop.org/xorg/driver/xf86-video-ati/ installed. The PCI ID
of my graphics card is (1002:)5d4f, which should be supported. The
manufacturer/model is Sapphire's X800 GTO Ultimate 256MB. The motherboard is a
RS482-based ATI board.

With "ati" driver (default after ubuntu's gfx detection), X doesn't start at
all. With "radeon" specified, X starts but only with 640x480 resolution whatever
I do.

This bug's aim would probably to have at least 2D working at higher resolutions,
and also have "ati" driver working correctly, ie. delegating the handling of gfx
to "radeon" driver. I can also get some debug output about eg. some variables at
some point in the driver code, if someone would like to know something more
specific. I've only casually looked at the driver code (and X is quite unknown
to me in other ways too), so I would need some specific points to study to
continue myself.

uname -a: Linux test-desktop 2.6.15-21-amd64-generic #1 SMP PREEMPT Fri Apr 21
16:42:20 UTC 2006 x86_64 GNU/Linux

lsmod:
Module Size Used by
rfcomm 45600 0
l2cap 30464 5 rfcomm
bluetooth 59268 4 rfcomm,l2cap
radeon 116768 0
drm 95656 1 radeon
powernow_k8 12992 1
cpufreq_powersave 3328 0
cpufreq_stats 8264 0
cpufreq_userspace 9184 1
cpufreq_ondemand 9768 0
cpufreq_conservative 10984 0
freq_table 6464 2 powernow_k8,cpufreq_stats
tc1100_wmi 9096 0
video 18824 0
acpi_sbs 24600 0
battery 12296 1 acpi_sbs
i2c_acpi_ec 7040 1 acpi_sbs
container 6272 0
button 8864 0
pcc_acpi 16128 0
sony_acpi 7060 0
ac 7176 1 acpi_sbs
dev_acpi 15364 0
hotkey 13768 0
ext3 145936 1
jbd 70952 1 ext3
ipv6 300416 8
dm_mod 63176 1
md_mod 76792 0
af_packet 28172 2
tuner 46244 0
tvaudio 28316 0
msp3400 36300 0
bttv 201296 0
video_buf 27012 1 bttv
i2c_algo_bit 11144 1 bttv
v4l2_common 9088 1 bttv
btcx_risc 6792 1 bttv
tveeprom 19344 1 bttv
i2c_core 26624 7
i2c_acpi_ec,tuner,tvaudio,msp3400,bttv,i2c_algo_bit,tveeprom
tsdev 10240 0
videodev 13696 1 bttv
snd_hda_intel 21664 0
8139too 31744 0
8139cp 26880 0
snd_hda_codec 170952 1 snd_hda_intel
floppy 74120 0
mii 7680 2 8139too,8139cp
snd_pcm_oss 59424 0
snd_mixer_oss 20608 1 snd_pcm_oss
ohci1394 37452 0
ieee1394 369688 1 ohci1394
snd_pcm 104712 3 snd_hda_intel,snd_hda_codec,snd_pcm_oss
snd_timer 29064 1 snd_pcm
snd 68576 6
snd_hda_intel,snd_hda_codec,snd_pcm_oss,snd_m...

Read more...

Revision history for this message
In , Timo Jyrinki (timo-jyrinki-hut) wrote :

Created an attachment (id=5527)
lspci

Revision history for this message
In , Timo Jyrinki (timo-jyrinki-hut) wrote :

Created an attachment (id=5528)
lspci -n

Revision history for this message
In , Timo Jyrinki (timo-jyrinki-hut) wrote :

Created an attachment (id=5529)
xvinfo

Revision history for this message
In , Timo Jyrinki (timo-jyrinki-hut) wrote :

Created an attachment (id=5530)
Xorg.0.log-ati

Xorg.0.log using the default "ati" driver (ie. X doesn't start).

Revision history for this message
In , Timo Jyrinki (timo-jyrinki-hut) wrote :

Created an attachment (id=5531)
Xorg.0.log radeon

Xorg.0.log using "radeon" (ie. X starts but only in 640x480 mode)

Revision history for this message
In , Timo Jyrinki (timo-jyrinki-hut) wrote :

Created an attachment (id=5532)
xorg.conf

Revision history for this message
In , Timo Jyrinki (timo-jyrinki-hut) wrote :

Forgot to mention that I also tried ati-1-0-branch, even though I didn't yet
find information what's different in that. Same results ("ati" does not work /
"radeon" gives 640x480).

Revision history for this message
In , Michel Dänzer (michel-daenzer) wrote :

Unless you really have two monitors connected, the 640x480 limit is probably due
to bug 5623.

As for the ati wrapper failing, that's probably the PCI ID missing in one of the
lists.

Revision history for this message
In , Timo Jyrinki (timo-jyrinki-hut) wrote :

I have an LCD monitor and TV connected. Disconnecting TV-out and rebooting
doesn't change a thing. However, Option "MonitorLayout" "TMDS,NONE" seems to fix
this problem as pointed out in bug 5623, but of course the detection should
succeed automatically. Now running successfully at 1280x1024.

About the ati-wrapper problem: I can't find a place in code where 5D4F wouldn't
be mentioned where other X800-series cards are, so it might be it's not just a
missing PCI ID. I checked atipciids.h, radeon_chipset.h, radeon_driver.c and
radeon_probe.c. It probably does not matter that this is not really a "X850 Pro"
card but one of these rebranded X800 GTO cards.

Revision history for this message
In , Sroland-vmware (sroland-vmware) wrote :

(In reply to comment #9)
> About the ati-wrapper problem: I can't find a place in code where 5D4F wouldn't
> be mentioned where other X800-series cards are, so it might be it's not just a
> missing PCI ID. I checked atipciids.h, radeon_chipset.h, radeon_driver.c and
> radeon_probe.c. It probably does not matter that this is not really a "X850 Pro"
> card but one of these rebranded X800 GTO cards.
 Yes, that shouldn't matter at all. I think something might go wrong in the
ATIProbe function. Can't see what though at first glance, you could add some
printfs to that function-from-hell to see what's going on - I think ultimately
it should just end up calling that RadeonProbe function in the end, however I
can't even tell if it's expected that you get a warning that the device could
(naturally) not be attached as a mach64. The ati wrapper is kinda deprecated
though and may be removed in the future, I don't think anyone is really
interested in it and working on it. I certainly get a headache from looking at it.

Revision history for this message
In , Timo Jyrinki (timo-jyrinki-hut) wrote :

Created an attachment (id=5567)
example patch

A nice function, that is. Anyway, the attached example patch let's the radeon
driver do it job for me.

In the first part, if it's looking for Mach64's, is that kind of using of
ATIChipID a completely wrong thing to do? Without it, the code dwells into that
part of the code and yields "PCI Mach64 (...) could not be detected".

The second part is of course just a hack, but combined with the previous part:
is that pVideo->size[1] supposed to be some completely trustworthy thing to say
if a chip is a Mach64 (if FALSE) or something else (if TRUE)? Because in first
part it's false with my card, the code dwells into Mach64 code, and in the
second part the whole "look for block I/O devices"-code is skipped because of
!pVideo->size[1]?

I first used only the first part of the patch, and noticed that then it skipped
Mach64 code but also skipped block I/O devices code and found nothing.

Revision history for this message
In , Timo Jyrinki (timo-jyrinki-hut) wrote :

Created an attachment (id=5568)
Xorg.0.log-usingpatch

Xorg.0.log created with startx when using the patched version of the driver.

Revision history for this message
Ubuntu Lincoln (lincoln-0x4d) wrote : Re: X fails to start in dapper flight3 & 4 with ati X600

X600 is quite a common graphics card, Ubuntu should support it if possible.

Changed in xserver-xorg-driver-ati:
status: Needs Info → Confirmed
Revision history for this message
In , Brian-rapsure (brian-rapsure) wrote :

This is a description of two bugs. This bug needs to be split into two bugs.
1. The first bug that is covered is that the Sapphire Radeon X800 GTO is not
detected using the "ati" wrapper.
2. The second bug is that the driver won't change the resolution to anything
higher than 640x480 using the dvi output. Modelines work correctly when using
the vga output, in other words I have 1600x1200 using the vga output.

Pertaining to the first bug, I checked the radeon atipciids.h, and the pci id is
listed. For some reason the "ati" wrapper wants to detect the card as a mach64.
I saw the message detecting an X300SE on the second pci bus address as a mach64
also.

Revision history for this message
Francesco Mosca (fmosca) wrote : Re: X fails to start in dapper flight3 & 4 with ati X600

i'm using dapper since flight2 with a Radeon Mobility X600 and it works allright both radeon and fglrx drivers (i'm using the latter now and experimented with xgl+compiz as well: it works like a charm). the only thing i needed was ChipID 0x3150 in the device options (same for breezy). after an update-pciids the card shows up correctly in lspci as well.
hope this helps and is not off topic

Revision history for this message
In , Michel-tungstengraphics (michel-tungstengraphics) wrote :

(In reply to comment #13)
> 2. The second bug is that the driver won't change the resolution to anything
> higher than 640x480 using the dvi output. Modelines work correctly when using
> the vga output, in other words I have 1600x1200 using the vga output.

As pointed out before, this is probably bug 5623.

> For some reason the "ati" wrapper wants to detect the card as a mach64.

I think that's just the ati wrapper's way of saying 'I have no idea what this
is; I tried treating it as a Mach64 eventually, but it didn't work'.

Revision history for this message
In , Timo Jyrinki (timo-jyrinki-hut) wrote :

(In reply to comment #14)
> I think that's just the ati wrapper's way of saying 'I have no idea what this
> is; I tried treating it as a Mach64 eventually, but it didn't work'.

Well, I (think I) found that it's not like that. It looks like it is actually
detected as Mach64, and it's never even tried to be found out whether it's
Radeon or not (as Mach64 detection comes before Radeon). If you check the
portion of the patch in the code, it looks like the ati wrapper thinks a card is
a Mach64 if:
1. Chip is not MACH32 (but still made by ATI)
2. pVideo->size[1] == FALSE
(if the chip is MACH32 or the 2. is TRUE, it continues to Radeon model detection)

Please correct if I'm wrong, but that's how it currently looks to me (though I
might very easily miss something the function is doing). And similarly, if a
Mach64 is not found, a Radeon is "detected" by checking that the chip is still
not MACH32, and that pVideo->size[1] == TRUE.

Assuming ATIChipID can't be trusted wholely (as it only knows chips listed in
atipciids.h), would it be okay to use it if the chip id is actually found as
listed? Then the first part of the patch could be applied with additional
chip-id-was-found-in-the-pci-id-list check so that the Mach64 would be skipped
at least for the known/listed newer Radeons. And maybe in the latter part
similar check could also be made so that the Radeon code is enabled for the
known cards at least.

This bug might be affecting all "PCI-E Xxxx series cards", or does someone how a
working X300/X600/X700/X800 PCI-E card?

Revision history for this message
X600SE (reneubuntu) wrote : Re: X fails to start in dapper flight3 & 4 with ati X600

The result of my installation attempt: http://img144.imageshack.us/img144/2584/ubuntudapperdrakercinstallatio.jpg

Is there a workaround?

Revision history for this message
Susan Cragin (susancragin) wrote : Re: [Bug 28925] Re: X fails to start in dapper flight3 & 4 with ati X600

go to /etc/X11/xorg.conf

edit xorg.conf to include the following two lines near the end.

Option "MonitorLayout" "LVDS,CRT"
Option "MetaModes" "680x480,1680x1050"

Save and re-boot. That did it for me. Second Metamode option
should be your screen's resolution.

X600SE wrote:
> The result of my installation attempt:
> http://img144.imageshack.us/img144/2584/ubuntudapperdrakercinstallatio.jpg
>
> Is there a workaround?
>

Revision history for this message
Jarrett Miller (spook) wrote : Re: X fails to start in dapper flight3 & 4 with ati X600

I can confirm this as well using the 6.06 LTS. Dell optiplex GX620 + radeon X600 connected to a dell 1905FP via nalog vga connection. Server fails with "no screens detected" message. "vesa" or fglrx both work fine. Did not try "radeon" driver.

Revision history for this message
Florian Boucault (fboucault) wrote : Re: X fails to start in dapper flight3 & 4 with ati X600, onward all the way through dapper 6.06 LTS

Isn't it a duplicate of bug #22985 ?

Matt Zimmerman (mdz)
Changed in xserver-xorg-driver-ati:
assignee: ubuntu-x-swat → nobody
importance: Critical → High
Revision history for this message
X600SE (reneubuntu) wrote :

Knot 2 does not support ATI's X600 graphics card either. What a shame!

Revision history for this message
Timo Jyrinki (timo-jyrinki) wrote :

Gathering duplicates here, there are lots of them. The driver "ati" fails on many (most?) X300-X800 PCI-E cards, while "radeon" works though might not give bigger than 640x480 resolution without additional MonitoryLayout tweaking - even that would be better than blue screen of X.

Revision history for this message
Timo Jyrinki (timo-jyrinki) wrote :

(Many of the duplicate bugs were assigned to Ubuntu X SWAT team, so assigning this too. 14 duplicates now.)

Changed in xserver-xorg-video-ati:
assignee: nobody → ubuntu-x-swat
Bug Watch Updater (bug-watch-updater)
Changed in xserver-xorg-driver-ati:
status: Unknown → Confirmed
Revision history for this message
Tormod Volden (tormodvolden) wrote :

> on many (most?) X300-X800 PCI-E cards

It does not fail on Radeon Mobility X700 (RV410 PCIE).

Revision history for this message
Joachim Dahl (jdahl) wrote :

I installed Edgy RC AMD64 and X crashes my computer
with an ATI X800 card no matter if I use the ati, radeon or
vesa driver. Using the recommended fix:

Option "MonitorLayout" "LVDS,Auto"

doesn't make a difference for me.

Revision history for this message
stefab (bluefuture) wrote :

>I installed Edgy RC AMD64 and X crashes my computer
>with an ATI X800 card no matter if I use the ati, radeon or
>vesa driver. Using the recommended fix:
>
>Option "MonitorLayout" "LVDS,Auto"
>
>doesn't make a difference for me.

Same as me on an ATI X800GTO PCI-E with RC AMD64.. work only with fglrx binary ati driver but is not stable... i can never finish the installation because the video freeze every time at a different point.

Revision history for this message
frankie (frankie-etsetb) wrote :

Today I downloaded and burned ubuntu 6.10 Release Candidate. The installer was unable to to start xorg like it did before.

I manually changed xorg.conf from Driver "ati" to Driver "radeon" and gnome started. I run some applications for a while and it didn't crash as Stefano reported. I didn't run the install.

Revision history for this message
JohnCollaros (timefantom) wrote :

Im just noting I have opened a new bug here,

https://launchpad.net/distros/ubuntu/+source/xorg/+bug/68433

I have an X700, and I have had no luck in installing from the
official release of 6.10.

Changing the driver in Xorg.conf had no effect,
and, to be able to even get access to the console to check logs,
I had to select a vga mode from the boot screen (by pressing F4).

Revision history for this message
In , Timo Jyrinki (timo-jyrinki-hut) wrote :

*** Bug 7959 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Revision history for this message
In , Timo Jyrinki (timo-jyrinki-hut) wrote :

*** Bug 8778 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Revision history for this message
In , Timo Jyrinki (timo-jyrinki-hut) wrote :

(removing the "only 640x480" from the summary because it's a different issue
that has its own bug)

Revision history for this message
Timo Jyrinki (timo-jyrinki) wrote : Re: X fails to start in dapper flight3 & 4 with ati X600, onward all the way through dapper 6.06 LTS

As it turned out, #68433 was eventually fixed by changing the driver to "radeon" anyway.

Revision history for this message
In , Timo Jyrinki (timo-jyrinki-hut) wrote :

Considering Ubuntu has 16 duplicates for this problem
(https://launchpad.net/distros/ubuntu/+source/xserver-xorg-video-ati/+bug/28925),
I'd propose changing the severity to major, though I'm not sure how severity
levels are defined here. For out-of-the-box experience or for anyone new to free
OSs / X.org, this is a big problem.

Revision history for this message
DominikBodi (dominik-bodi) wrote : Re: X fails to start in dapper flight3 & 4 with ati X600, onward all the way through dapper 6.06 LTS

This is not a dupe of #22985
This bug is about the gfx card not being detected properly. For 22985, gfx card gets detected normally but the driver fails to use the right output port of th card.

Revision history for this message
Stijn Hoop (fritti) wrote :

Running into this with the edgy install CDs, had to get the alternate install CD and then use a VGA mode before I could install onto an Dell Optiplex GX620. PCI-ids for the X600 PCI-express inside are the same as those in comment 15, switching from the 'ati' driver to the 'radeon' driver post-install gets me a useable desktop (although I've not tried 3D yet).

Revision history for this message
David (whitefolkz) wrote :

Is there a reason why it doesn't start go through the boot process like normal, and before launching X, if it detects any of these cards, pops up a ncurses window and asks if you want to install the radeon or fglrx driver? It would solve the problem of installing a binary driver (since it gives the user the option of what to install, and can have a disclaimer and warning on why this is bad). This could also be done with the 2 different nvidia drivers as well...

Revision history for this message
Timo Jyrinki (timo-jyrinki) wrote :

If some kind of more sophisticated card detection is going to be done for feisty's automatic X configuration, and no-one is interested in fixing this upstream, this could be easily solved by choosing "radeon" driver instead of "ati" for at least X300-X800 cards.

And no, fglrx should not be used for these cards, since there's a working open source 3D driver available - open source drivers are meant to be used in every place where it's not absolutely necessary for 3D, meaning currently using binary drivers for ATI X1300-X1950 and all NVIDIA cards.

Revision history for this message
asdf (asdf123123-deactivatedaccount-deactivatedaccount) wrote :

First i was a bit annoyed that it did not work out of the box, cos i already had the same problem with Dapper. However changing the driver from ati to radeon made it work (even DRI did work) So I finally ask myself why does the Ubuntu installer not try with radeon too?

Revision history for this message
spliffy (supernova506) wrote :

i dont have the radeon driver in my list only ati (i have a x800gto)
can any1 help im haveing the same prob

Revision history for this message
In , Timo Jyrinki (timo-jyrinki-hut) wrote :

Created an attachment (id=8275)
radeon-detect.patch

Added something "proper" to the second problematic place in the code, plus
comments. Applies to latest git. What do you think, any sense in that or does
it expose to some problems?

The root problem still probably is why none of us, who have problematic (PCI-E,
apparently) X600/X700/X800 cards, have pVideo->size[1] set. Though I don't even
know if it has to be set, as everything works properly anyway using this patch
or the driver "radeon" in xorg.conf.

Revision history for this message
ThorbjørnTux (martsummsw) wrote : Duplicate(s) and also X800 - problem also in feisty

This bug-report seems to contain different bugs...

I have the same problem as stefano fabri in the AMD-64 version in
Feisty Herd-1.

In the i386 version (for Feisty) I filled a new bug-report, which is just a duplicate of the main problem. The "ati" does not work ....

https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bug/77565
(It has links to even more duplicates...)

Revision history for this message
Susan Cragin (susancragin) wrote : Re: [Bug 28925] Duplicate(s) and also X800 - problem also in feisty

ThorbjørnTux:
Part of this problem may be confusion with bug reports concerning the malfunction of initramfs-tools, which causes the system not to boot under AMD-64.

Revision history for this message
Timo Jyrinki (timo-jyrinki) wrote :

This bug is mainly about the problem when X doesn't start and /var/log/Xorg.0.log shows the following kind of lines:
(WW) ATI: PCI Mach64 in slot 8:0:0 could not be detected!
(WW) ATI: PCI Mach64 in slot 8:0:1 could not be detected!
(EE) No devices detected.

Ie. the upstream bug is about that.

Revision history for this message
In , Airlied-freedesktop (airlied-freedesktop) wrote :

Okay I've committed this please close the bug if it fixes the problem..

Revision history for this message
In , Timo Jyrinki (timo-jyrinki-hut) wrote :

Thanks a lot for applying the patch. It works for me now with the latest GIT and
Driver "ati", and hopefully it works for all the others as well.

(now if only I'd be able to fix bug 5991 and/or bug 5623 to give >640x480
resolution without specifying MonitorLayout... :)

Revision history for this message
Timo Jyrinki (timo-jyrinki) wrote :

My small patch was accepted in upstream, so this might be now fixed in the latest GIT version of xserver-xorg-video-ati, but not yet available in Ubuntu development branch feisty. This bug should only be marked "Fix Released" when new enough ATI driver is fetched to Ubuntu.

If you want to test it with feisty, something like this should work:

1. sudo apt-get build-essential install debhelper pkg-config xserver-xorg-dev x11proto-gl-dev x11proto-xext-dev x11proto-core-dev x11proto-video-dev x11proto-xinerama-dev x11proto-xf86misc-dev libgl1-mesa-dev x11proto-fonts-dev x11proto-randr-dev x11proto-render-dev libdrm-dev x11proto-xf86dri-dev quilt
2. git clone git://anongit.freedesktop.org/git/xorg/driver/xf86-video-ati
3. cd xf86-video-ati
4. sh autogen.sh && ./configure --prefix=/usr
5. Edit config.h file and add the following lines:
#define PACKAGE_VERSION_MAJOR 1
#define PACKAGE_VERSION_MINOR 2
#define PACKAGE_VERSION_PATCHLEVEL 2
6. make
7. sudo make install
8. edit xorg.conf to use Driver "ati" and restart X

Changed in xserver-xorg-video-ati:
status: Confirmed → In Progress
Revision history for this message
Tollef Fog Heen (tfheen) wrote :

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

Format: 1.7
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2007 15:51:13 +0100
Source: xserver-xorg-video-ati
Binary: xserver-xorg-video-ati
Architecture: source
Version: 1:6.6.2-0ubuntu5
Distribution: feisty
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Debian X Strike Force <email address hidden>
Changed-By: Tollef Fog Heen <email address hidden>
Description:
 xserver-xorg-video-ati - X.Org X server -- ATI display driver
Changes:
 xserver-xorg-video-ati (1:6.6.2-0ubuntu5) feisty; urgency=low
 .
   * Pull in patch from upstream which fixes misdetection of some Radeon
     chipsets. LP: #28925
Files:
 8f8b5d3484ad15829319c1cc14bcffba 1209 x11 optional xserver-xorg-video-ati_6.6.2-0ubuntu5.dsc
 d3cf77aec1537588e0ea1c4a9a6c00fa 23762 x11 optional xserver-xorg-video-ati_6.6.2-0ubuntu5.diff.gz

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iQCVAwUBRaehFccmO3YsB1PjAQIaiwP+I7lzK/5MV3HNu2MImyWr+i2nx2DQy1CQ
GR4bs2/b2cAyieaNiyT/odTnHvwTOqT0r0uZKcubSMu8QxyMiLGATbY1XrD7BbxJ
z0DrEe+0h0+2NErXdRx1+4ViBS8g+Q4kAdt/iSLq7rhhMJ5D60euU/sa8T7dzcuW
c9o2x/MMZxs=
=/n1i
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Changed in xserver-xorg-video-ati:
status: In Progress → Fix Released
Bug Watch Updater (bug-watch-updater)
Changed in xserver-xorg-driver-ati:
status: Confirmed → Fix Released
Revision history for this message
Janek (thefoxx) wrote :

This problem is here still with feisty herd 2!
ATI Radeon X700

Revision history for this message
Timo Jyrinki (timo-jyrinki) wrote :

Yes, the new version of the driver was put in just _after_ herd 2. Try eg. newest daily like http://cdimage.ubuntu.com/daily-live/20070114/feisty-desktop-i386.iso

Revision history for this message
Richard Bailey (rmjb) wrote :

You guys rock! The latest builds work flawlessly on my X800 where before they'd fail miserably. I don't know if this issue is related but usplash also works properly now off the desktop CD.

Revision history for this message
Paul Swartz (paulswartz) wrote :

I think I'm having a problem related to this bug. My ATI X1400 is not detected correctly. X tries to use the the ati driver, but when it starts something is not correct. The mouse appears as a diagonal line, everything is stretched diagonally so far as to be unreadable. Changing the driver to "vesa" allowed me to get into X and set up fglrx, which works fine.

Revision history for this message
ytsejam82 (peppezic) wrote :

I just downloaded and installed debian etch (netinst) 2.6.18 for amd-64. (should be similar)
Here is my pc architecture:
Amd 64 X2
X800 PCI-E

at the first run X server crashed I tried to overwrite "ati" driver with "radeon" but I just saw black screen and everything was unusable...
Now Timo I was trying to follow your instructions about the patch you were talking about but I had a problem during the procedure, exactly right after the build-essential and the git , when I try to run the shell script
>sh autogen.sh && ./configure --prefix=/usr
  it says that "autocoreconf" command (specified in the shell script) doesn't exist. I looked for it through apt but no result...
Do you have a solution?

Thx anyway.

Regards.

Revision history for this message
Timo Jyrinki (timo-jyrinki) wrote :

autoreconf comes from "autoconf" package, and you probably need at least the "build-essential" package and "libtool" package, too.

The "Driver "radeon"" should fix the issue also on etch, though, even without patching.

Revision history for this message
imtoocoolfrscool (imtoocoolfrscool) wrote :

Sorry, I'm new to this, but how do I open and edit the 'xorg.conf' file?

And where do I find it?

Revision history for this message
AJenbo (ajenbo) wrote :

On 9.10 using the following card.

01:00.0 VGA compatible controller: ATI Technologies Inc R423 UK [Radeon X800SE (PCIE)]
01:00.1 Display controller: ATI Technologies Inc Radeon R423 UK (PCIE) [X800 SE] (Secondary)
01:00.0 0300: 1002:554b
01:00.1 0380: 1002:556b

Desktop effects works fine, but the video test in checkbox is just black and System ▸ Administration ▸ Hardware drivers shows no drivers to activate (or deativate).

Revision history for this message
AJenbo (ajenbo) wrote :

Open arena does not render (just black), quake live works, but if i go in to full screen, the screen is all messed up when i com back (wrong resolution, displayed area is below the bottom of the screen, can't see the top menu bar, screen not rotated. When running the resolutions test in checkbox it leaves me in the last resolution.

Revision history for this message
AJenbo (ajenbo) wrote :

Flash 10.1 also works (i'm on a 64bit system)

Revision history for this message
AJenbo (ajenbo) wrote :

Hmm i ended here as a series of "duplicate of" turns, but this error seams a bit different to mine, should i start a new bug repot?

Bug Watch Updater (bug-watch-updater)
Changed in xserver-xorg-driver-ati:
importance: Unknown → High
Bug Watch Updater (bug-watch-updater)
Changed in xserver-xorg-driver-ati:
importance: High → Unknown
Bug Watch Updater (bug-watch-updater)
Changed in xserver-xorg-driver-ati:
importance: Unknown → High
To post a comment you must log in.
This report contains Public information  
Everyone can see this information.
Subscribing...

Other bug subscribers

Remote bug watches

Bug watches keep track of this bug in other bug trackers.