gEnTi wrote:

> If I open a folder in nautilus then it opens that on my machine much
> faster. I got an old pIII 800 mhz.

gee, you're a genius. let me guess, you also have preview enabled in
konqueror? if you have crappy hardware don't expect it to have
bells&whistles that run just fine on new hardware.

>> The only problem I have encountered relates to X.org performance.
>> Although I specified the radeon driver for my display, I'm still noticing
>> unfortunately high CPU usage by X when doing things like outputing long
>> scrolling displays. I would have thought that using the radeon driver
>> (for my Radeon 7500) would have resulted in much higher performance. Am I
>> wrong? Could DRI not be working properly? How can I check?
>
> You can check if DRI is working by examining the output of the "glxinfo"
> command.

For me, glxinfo says (relevant portions)

- - - -
direct rendering: No
server glx vendor string: SGI
server glx version string: 1.2
OpenGL vendor string: Mesa project: www.mesa3d.org
OpenGL renderer string: Mesa GLX Indirect
OpenGL version string: 1.2 (1.4 Mesa 5.0.2)
- - - -

There's no mention of ati or radeon. Any idea what may be going on here?
My xorg.conf contains:

- - - -
Load "glx"
....
Section "Device"
Identifier "ATI"
Driver "ati"
#VideoRam 4096
# Insert Clocks lines here if appropriate
EndSection

Section "Screen"
Identifier "Screen 1"
Device "ATI"
Monitor "Samsung"
- - - -

On the other hand, Xorg.0.log does seem to suggest that ATI and Radeon
specific drivers are loading. So this seems to conflict with the glxinfo?

- - - -
Radeon-specific(II) Loading extension GLX
(II) LoadModule: "ati"
(II) Loading /usr/X11R6/lib/modules/drivers/ati_drv.o
(II) Module ati: vendor="X.Org Foundation"
compiled for 6.7.0, module version = 6.5.6
Module class: X.Org Video Driver
ABI class: X.Org Video Driver, version 0.7
(II) ATI: ATI driver (version 6.5.6) for chipsets: ati, ativga
(II) R128: Driver for ATI Rage 128 chipsets:
....
(--) Chipset ATI Radeon 7500 QW (AGP/PCI) found
- - - -

> I'm not sure how the performance compares, but I have had seemingly good
> results using the "ati" driver rather than the "radeon" driver for my
> wife's Radeon 7000, and loading the radeon *kernel* module prior to
> starting X.

I have the radeon driver loaded in rc.modules, and lsmod shows that it is
loaded (though unused). I have no idea what's going on with X drivers,
with Slackware 9 I had pretty much the same setup and I know that glxinfo
did show that my radeon driver was working. Any ideas?

Jem Berkes wrote:


>
>
>>I'm not sure how the performance compares, but I have had seemingly good
>>results using the "ati" driver rather than the "radeon" driver for my
>>wife's Radeon 7000, and loading the radeon *kernel* module prior to
>>starting X.
>
>
> I have the radeon driver loaded in rc.modules, and lsmod shows that it is
> loaded (though unused). I have no idea what's going on with X drivers,
> with Slackware 9 I had pretty much the same setup and I know that glxinfo
> did show that my radeon driver was working. Any ideas?
>
Ok from what I see you need to add or uncomment a line that says:

Load "dri"

and at the end of your config file you should have a dri entry like this
that needs to be uncommented:

Section "DRI"
Mode 0666
EndSection


-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

>> I have the radeon driver loaded in rc.modules, and lsmod shows that it is
>> loaded (though unused). I have no idea what's going on with X drivers,
>> with Slackware 9 I had pretty much the same setup and I know that glxinfo
>> did show that my radeon driver was working. Any ideas?
>>
> Ok from what I see you need to add or uncomment a line that says:
>
> Load "dri"
>
> and at the end of your config file you should have a dri entry like this
> that needs to be uncommented:
>
> Section "DRI"
> Mode 0666
> EndSection

The default /etc/X11/xorg.conf didn't contain either, but I have added
these options and restarted X. Unfortunately the output to glxinfo didn't
change at all.

I'm rather confused by this because now my configuration is pretty much
identical to what I had with XFree86 under Slackware 9.1. Back then I
remember seeing something about ATI or Radeon from glxinfo.

> The default /etc/X11/xorg.conf didn't contain either, but I have added
> these options and restarted X. Unfortunately the output to glxinfo didn't
> change at all.
>
> I'm rather confused by this because now my configuration is pretty much
> identical to what I had with XFree86 under Slackware 9.1. Back then I
> remember seeing something about ATI or Radeon from glxinfo.

I figured it out, so I thought I'd share. The clues were in
/var/log/Xorg.0.log

Looking for warning (WW) lines, I found this out of the ordinary:
(WW) RADEON(0): [agp] AGP not available
....
(II) RADEON(0): Direct rendering disabled

Aha, so it's an AGP issue. Which surprised me, because I had both modprobe
radeon and modprobe agpgart in /etc/rc.d/rc.modules. But the problem
turned out to be the order in which these kernel modules are loaded. You
have to make sure that the AGP driver is loaded before any video drivers,
otherwise the video driver is unaware of the AGP bus. This fixed it:

/sbin/modprobe agpgart
/sbin/modprobe radeon

Now glxinfo shows,

direct rendering: Yes
....
OpenGL vendor string: Tungsten Graphics, Inc.
OpenGL renderer string: Mesa DRI Radeon 20030328 AGP 1x x86/MMX+/3DNow!+/SSE TCL
OpenGL version string: 1.2 Mesa 5.0.2
....

- Jem