Re: DRI doesn't work on 2.4.0 but does on prerelease-ac5

[khromy]

On Mon, Jan 08, 2001 at 06:35:43PM +0000, Michael D. Crawford wrote:
> OK, I built XFree86 4.0.2 and DRI seems to be working for me now under
> 2.4.0-ac4.  (Starting with 2.4.0, it wouldn't, this is with an ATI XPert 2000
> AGP).
> 
> BUT - although /var/log/XFree86.0.log documents the startup of DRI, DRM and AGP,
> and states the info about their initialization and stuff so that it looks like
> they're working, I don't notice any performance difference running any of the
> Mesa-3.4 demos whether or not I use DRI, and whether I run 4.0.1 or 4.0.2.
> 
> This makes me suspect it's not really working, or else my build of the Mesa-3.4
> library wasn't configured right - but note that if I disable DRI, one of the
> Mesa demos will comment that it's not available.
> 
> A specific example is Mesa-3.4/demos/gloss.  It's a rotating textured cylinder
> that is partially reflective of what seems to be a landscape that is in front of
> the screen being reflecting back to the viewer.  I get a pretty consistent 7.5
> frames per second:
> 
> - in 4.0.1 with no DRI
> - in 4.0.1 with DRI
> - in 4.0.2 with no DRI
> - in 4.0.2 with DRI
> 
> Having agpgart and drm/r128 compiled in or as modules also doesn't appear to
> make a difference.
> 
> The frame rate for gloss drops to about 3.5 if I run geartrain (another demo)
> alongside it.  Geartrain by itself seems to be about the same speed in all
> cases, though it doesn't report a number.
> 
> There are a couple benchmarking tools in Mesa if someone wanted hard numbers
> from me.
> 
> Can anyone suggest any 3D code that I can download that does more complex things
> than the mesa demos that I can test this with?
> 
> Is my DRI really working?  If not, any tips on getting it to do so?
I have this same problem with a Voodoo 3 2000(tdfx) running 2.4.0 and XFree86 4.0.2.

-- 
L1:	khromy		;khromy(at)khromy.lnuxlab.net