FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Gentoo > Gentoo User

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 11-05-2010, 08:38 PM
Mick
 
Default Setting up two monitors

On Friday 05 November 2010 11:11:04 YoYo Siska wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 04, 2010 at 11:08:23PM +0000, Mick wrote:
> > On Thursday 04 November 2010 21:36:46 Florian Philipp wrote:
> > > Am 04.11.2010 21:17, schrieb Mick:
> > > [...]
> > >
> > > > Then I ran xrandr again as Florian suggested and this is what it
> > > > shows:
> > > >
> > > > $ xrandr --output DVI-0 --auto <--this gives 1920x1080
> > > > $ xrandr --output DVI-0 --right-of-VGA-0 --verbose
> > > > xrandr: screen cannot be larger than 1920x1920 (desired size
> > > > 3200x1080)
> > > >
> > > > As a result it does not place the DVI on the right of the VGA driven
> > > > monitor. Can you please explain this error to me - why does it
> > > > complain?
> > >
> > > Hmm, do you still have an xorg.conf file or changed settings in
> > > /etc/X11/xorg.conf.d? If you have, can you post it please?
> > >
> > > I think it is related to the
> > > 'SubSection "Device"
> > >
> > > Virtual xdim ydim'
> > >
> > > setting but I'm not sure. In any case, if I were you, I'd try running
> > > without any xorg.conf and see whether auto-configuration can handle it.
> > > Oh, and if you are still on x11-base/xorg-server-1.7.*, please try
> > > x11-base/xorg-server-1.8.2 with USE="udev -hal"
> >
> > Thanks again Florian,
> >
> > I do not have an xorg.conf. I am running x11-base/xorg-server-1.7.7-r1.
> > I have been waiting on 1.8.2 to go stable.
> >
> > Googling around I suspect I know what the error is:
> >
> > $ xrandr -q
> > Screen 0: minimum 320 x 200, current 1280 x 1024, maximum 1920 x 1920
> >
> > is telling me that my ATI X600 can only do a max of 1920 x 1920. Above
> > that I will need to set up a virtual screen (and it won't be able to do
> > dri).
> >
> > Without an xorg.conf file it is failing because it is not given a virtual
> > screen to expand its physical capability beyond 1920x1920. Any idea if I
> > can set up a virtual screen using the .fdi files?
>
> Intel drivers (for my thinkpad notebook) had a similar problem. If you
> didn't use an xorg.conf, they would set up the max screen size to the
> maximum possible resolution on one of the monitors... I haven't found a
> way to change that without an xorg.conf... (didn't have much motivation
> as I just always used an xorg.conf, event with hal... and I'm on ~arch,
> so its not much of an issue now...)
>
> yoyo
>
>
> PS right now, the current intel driver I have seems to have a hard maximum
> of 2048x2048 on my card, though I remember going above that in the
> past... ;((

(I was wondering how come MSWindows works fine - not sure if it uses virtual
screens ...)

Are you saying that the maximum mode of the video card is determined by the
driver? Two different ati cards here, both show 1920x1920 as the maximum.
The card I am having this problem with has 256M memory. The other has 1G
memory (in MSWindows) while Gentoo only shows:

Memory at d0000000 (32-bit, prefetchable) [size=256M]
I/O ports at 2000 [size=256]
Memory at cfef0000 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=64K]
[virtual] Expansion ROM at cfe00000 [disabled] [size=128K]

If the maximum mode available changes with the driver version, does this mean
that one day I need to set up a virtual screen size and next day the driver is
updated and virtual screen is no longer required?
--
Regards,
Mick
 
Old 11-06-2010, 08:57 AM
YoYo Siska
 
Default Setting up two monitors

On Fri, Nov 05, 2010 at 09:38:07PM +0000, Mick wrote:
> On Friday 05 November 2010 11:11:04 YoYo Siska wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 04, 2010 at 11:08:23PM +0000, Mick wrote:
> > > On Thursday 04 November 2010 21:36:46 Florian Philipp wrote:
> > > > Am 04.11.2010 21:17, schrieb Mick:
> > > > [...]
> > > >
> > > > > Then I ran xrandr again as Florian suggested and this is what it
> > > > > shows:
> > > > >
> > > > > $ xrandr --output DVI-0 --auto <--this gives 1920x1080
> > > > > $ xrandr --output DVI-0 --right-of-VGA-0 --verbose
> > > > > xrandr: screen cannot be larger than 1920x1920 (desired size
> > > > > 3200x1080)
> > > > >
> > > > > As a result it does not place the DVI on the right of the VGA driven
> > > > > monitor. Can you please explain this error to me - why does it
> > > > > complain?
> > > >
> > > > Hmm, do you still have an xorg.conf file or changed settings in
> > > > /etc/X11/xorg.conf.d? If you have, can you post it please?
> > > >
> > > > I think it is related to the
> > > > 'SubSection "Device"
> > > >
> > > > Virtual xdim ydim'
> > > >
> > > > setting but I'm not sure. In any case, if I were you, I'd try running
> > > > without any xorg.conf and see whether auto-configuration can handle it.
> > > > Oh, and if you are still on x11-base/xorg-server-1.7.*, please try
> > > > x11-base/xorg-server-1.8.2 with USE="udev -hal"
> > >
> > > Thanks again Florian,
> > >
> > > I do not have an xorg.conf. I am running x11-base/xorg-server-1.7.7-r1.
> > > I have been waiting on 1.8.2 to go stable.
> > >
> > > Googling around I suspect I know what the error is:
> > >
> > > $ xrandr -q
> > > Screen 0: minimum 320 x 200, current 1280 x 1024, maximum 1920 x 1920
> > >
> > > is telling me that my ATI X600 can only do a max of 1920 x 1920. Above
> > > that I will need to set up a virtual screen (and it won't be able to do
> > > dri).
> > >
> > > Without an xorg.conf file it is failing because it is not given a virtual
> > > screen to expand its physical capability beyond 1920x1920. Any idea if I
> > > can set up a virtual screen using the .fdi files?
> >
> > Intel drivers (for my thinkpad notebook) had a similar problem. If you
> > didn't use an xorg.conf, they would set up the max screen size to the
> > maximum possible resolution on one of the monitors... I haven't found a
> > way to change that without an xorg.conf... (didn't have much motivation
> > as I just always used an xorg.conf, event with hal... and I'm on ~arch,
> > so its not much of an issue now...)
> >
> > yoyo
> >
> >
> > PS right now, the current intel driver I have seems to have a hard maximum
> > of 2048x2048 on my card, though I remember going above that in the
> > past... ;((
>
> (I was wondering how come MSWindows works fine - not sure if it uses virtual
> screens ...)
>
> Are you saying that the maximum mode of the video card is determined by the
> driver? Two different ati cards here, both show 1920x1920 as the maximum.
> The card I am having this problem with has 256M memory. The other has 1G
> memory (in MSWindows) while Gentoo only shows:
>
> Memory at d0000000 (32-bit, prefetchable) [size=256M]
> I/O ports at 2000 [size=256]
> Memory at cfef0000 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=64K]
> [virtual] Expansion ROM at cfe00000 [disabled] [size=128K]
>
> If the maximum mode available changes with the driver version, does this mean
> that one day I need to set up a virtual screen size and next day the driver is
> updated and virtual screen is no longer required?

From what I know (but I may be completely wrong its this way:
the maximum size xrandr reports is what X thinks is the maximum possible
framebuffer size... Its reported by the graphics card driver, which (I
think) should be the maximum resolution the graphics card supports.
This depends on the card, the amount of memory it has (which gets a bit
complicated with cards with shared memory, that can dynamically allocate
how much they actually need) etc...

AFAIK this value is "constant" for X (it can't change without restart),
and X will never allow you to have a large 'virtual screen' (i.e.
the space in which all outputs have to fit)

But I've seen drivers that don't report the maximum they support, but
the maximum resolution of the actually connected display:
The driver should report to X, what display devices are connected to
the card and which resolutions they support -- the things you see in
xrandr output. It seems that that some drivers report the maximum of
these resolutions (ati and older intel, though newer intel drivers seem to
report 2048x2048 or 4096x4096, I can't say for newer ati, as I don't
have an ati card...)

I guess that this is mostly a 'historical' issue from the times when
Xserver/drivers did not support 'dynamic' monitor configuration (ie
adding/removing monitors) without restarting the Xserver...

You can override this value with the Virtual option (It used to be in
the screen section of xorg.conf, now the correct place seems to be in
the Device section).

IIRC, the driver will still change it to the maximum it supports, if you
made it bigger, but not to the maximum resolution of the connected
displays Also, some drivers may have other limitations (e.g. hardware 3D
acceleration might not work with size greater tha 2048x2048)

All this is about the "new" Xrandr 1.2 interface (as opposed to old
xinerama and multiple screens, that were used to setup multiple monitors
before xrandr 1.2 and required restart of the Xserver to change
things..) Its still relatively new, and the drivers still have problems
implementing it correctly, the support really changes from version
to version... (there was a lot of other changes in xserver from 1.6,
1.7, to 1.8 and also in the kernel (KMS,DRI) so the drivers had/have a
lot to catch up...)

You can read more about xrandr at http://www.x.org/wiki/Projects/XRandR

For your last question: right now, yes. The drivers are changing... But
hopefully, they will get to a state, when they will report everything
corectly and you should not need to set anything... )

BTW, nvidia drivers ignore the xrandr way, they have their own
extension to manage multihead displays, and they just report through
xrandr the final 'metamodes' (which are basically the sizes of the
virtual screen for each configuration) and they alway report the maximu
size as the size of the maximum metamode

yoyo
 
Old 11-06-2010, 12:32 PM
Mick
 
Default Setting up two monitors

Thank you all for your pointers! It works (almost) with
xorg-server-1.9.2. More questions below ...

On 6 November 2010 09:57, YoYo Siska <yoyo@gl.ksp.sk> wrote:

> You can read more about xrandr at http://www.x.org/wiki/Projects/XRandR
>
> For your last question: right now, yes. The drivers are changing... But
> hopefully, they will get to a state, when they will report everything
> corectly and you should not need to set anything... )

With the xorg-server-1.9.2 and a different kernel driver it now
recognises much more real estate:

$ xrandr -q
Screen 0: minimum 320 x 200, current 3200 x 1080, maximum 4096 x 4096
VGA-0 connected 1280x1024+0+0 (normal left inverted right x axis y
axis) 359mm x 287mm
1280x1024 75.0*+ 60.0
1152x864 75.0
1024x768 85.0 75.1 70.1 60.0
832x624 74.6
800x600 85.1 72.2 75.0 60.3 56.2
640x480 85.0 72.8 75.0 66.7 60.0
720x400 70.1
DVI-0 connected 1920x1080+1280+0 (normal left inverted right x axis y
axis) 509mm x 286mm
1920x1080 60.0*+
1280x1024 75.0 60.0
1152x864 75.0
1024x768 75.1 60.0
800x600 75.0 60.3
640x480 75.0 60.0
720x400 70.1
S-video disconnected (normal left inverted right x axis y axis)

As you can see the maximum size has now grown to 4906 x 4096 which
allows me to have the two monitors set up as intended with space to
spare! :-)

No need to define virtual screen size in the xorg.conf, which I
generated using the vanilla X -configure output. I have not added a
second screen or anything else. The -configure script seems to have
only included my small monitor on the left and it does not mention at
all the new DVI. So, I suspect that all the hard work is performed by
the kernel hardware driver ...

Which brings me to the changes I had to perform on the kernel. The
only combination that would allow the above to work involved
rebuilding the kernel with CONFIG_DRM_RADEON_KMS=y

This caused its own problems - I could not get a framebuffer working
during boot and afterwards I could not get a kdm Display Manager
showing up. It dropped me back to console. Ctrl+Alt+F7 was not
advisable as it locked the machine up, as did restarting xdm. The
solution was to remove uvesa framebuffer from my kernel and also
remove the following lines from my grub.conf:

#video=uvesafb:mtrr,ywrap,1024x768-32@64
splash=silent,fadein,theme:emergence quiet CONSOLE=/dev/tty1

Now I get a framebuffer with all my boot messages, but do not get a
pretty framebuffer splash or whatever you call it these days.

The second problem is that although the screen settings can be applied
and take without any problem, they are not retained if I log
out/reboot.

So, two questions remain:

1. Is there a way of setting up a framebuffer splash with a progress
bar and a background image in non-verbose mode when using the new KMS
kernel option?

2. How can I save the screen settings so that they persist between
boots? I found a script mentioning setting up a configuration file in
/etc/X11/Xsession.d/45custom_xrandr-settings:

http://www.thinkwiki.org/wiki/Xorg_RandR_1.2#Now_automate_it_on_login

but I am not sure if this is a Gentoo compatible way (have not tried it yet).
--
Regards,
Mick
 
Old 11-07-2010, 07:19 PM
Mick
 
Default Setting up two monitors

On Saturday 06 November 2010 13:32:53 you wrote:

> So, two questions remain:
>
> 1. Is there a way of setting up a framebuffer splash with a progress
> bar and a background image in non-verbose mode when using the new KMS
> kernel option?

The solution to this problem was to uninstall the uvesa module, and change the
stanza in grub.conf from this:

kernel /kernel-2.6.34-gentoo-r12 root=/dev/sda3
video=uvesafb:mtrr,ywrap,1280x1024-32@64 splash=silent,fadein,theme:emergence
quiet CONSOLE=/dev/tty1

to this:

kernel /kernel-2.6.34-gentoo-r12 root=/dev/sda3
video=uvesafb:mode_option=1280x1024-24,mtrr=3,scroll=ywrap,splash=silent,fadein,theme: emergence
quiet CONSOLE=/dev/tty1

Strangely enough it works without crashing now and it doesn't seem to mind the
video=uvesafb: entry although uvesa is no longer in my kernel. The splash
screen only covers part of the wide screen monitor on the right (i.e. it does
not stretch across it's whole width). The smaller left hand side monitor
shows the splash full size. The only glitch seems to be that it drops me back
to the console, after I enter the passwd in kdm. I had this problem in the
past (for years) and after some update it just went away. With this set up it
seems to be back ...

> 2. How can I save the screen settings so that they persist between
> boots? I found a script mentioning setting up a configuration file in
> /etc/X11/Xsession.d/45custom_xrandr-settings:
>
> http://www.thinkwiki.org/wiki/Xorg_RandR_1.2#Now_automate_it_on_login
>
> but I am not sure if this is a Gentoo compatible way (have not tried it
> yet).

No need to use any other configuration file, now that I am using an xorg.conf.
All I did was to define the second monitor, after I had a quick look for its
values as probed from EDID in Xorg.0.log:
============================================
Section "Monitor"
#DisplaySize 360 290 # mm
Identifier "Monitor0"
VendorName "NEC"
ModelName "NEC LCD1860NX"
HorizSync 31.0 - 82.0
VertRefresh 55.0 - 85.0
Option "PreferredMode" "1280x1024"
Option "DPMS"
EndSection

Section "Monitor"
#DisplaySize 510 290 # mm
Identifier "Monitor1"
VendorName "DEL"
ModelName "DELL ST2320L"
HorizSync 56.0 - 76.0
VertRefresh 30.0 - 83.0
Option "PreferredMode" "1920x1080"
Option "RightOf" "Monitor0"
Option "DPMS"
EndSection
============================================


Then under Section "Device" I added the two monitors as follows:
============================================
Section "Device"
Identifier "Card0"
Driver "radeon"
BusID "PCI:1:0:0"
Option "monitor-VGA-0" "Monitor0"
Option "monitor-DVI-0" "Monitor1"
EndSection
============================================

Hope this helps someone. :-)
--
Regards,
Mick
 
Old 11-08-2010, 10:43 AM
Sebastian Beßler
 
Default Setting up two monitors

Am 07.11.2010 21:19, schrieb Mick:

> The splash screen only covers part of the wide screen monitor on the
> right (i.e. it does not stretch across it's whole width). The
> smaller left hand side monitor shows the splash full size.

That is a quirk(?) in kernel mode setting (kms) because it can only set
the output to clone-mode when used with two or more monitors. Because of
that it has to find the lowest common denominator for the resolution to
use on all of them.

Greetings

Sebastian Beßler
 
Old 11-08-2010, 11:06 AM
Mick
 
Default Setting up two monitors

On Monday 08 November 2010 11:43:00 Sebastian Beßler wrote:
> Am 07.11.2010 21:19, schrieb Mick:
> > The splash screen only covers part of the wide screen monitor on the
> > right (i.e. it does not stretch across it's whole width). The
> > smaller left hand side monitor shows the splash full size.
>
> That is a quirk(?) in kernel mode setting (kms) because it can only set
> the output to clone-mode when used with two or more monitors. Because of
> that it has to find the lowest common denominator for the resolution to
> use on all of them.

Ah! That explains it. With two monitors of the same size then, it would be
full size on both.

After all this the user asked me to take off the splash screen! :-@

It seems that after xdm/kdm has launched the kdm login is interrupted and the
user is dumped into a console. This seems to happen at the time the init
scripts obtain an IP address (or when vixie cron is launched). Nothing in the
logs to show anything being amiss.

If I do not use a splash screen the user is not returned to the console. Not
sure if there's a fix for this.

--
Regards,
Mick
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 04:38 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright ©2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org