On Mon, 2015-03-02 at 19:07 +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Mon, Mar 02, 2015 at 11:33:39AM -0500, Brian J. Murrell wrote: > > On Mon, 2015-03-02 at 09:07 +0000, Chris Wilson wrote: > > > > > Can you please attach dmesg with drm.debug=6 on the command line? > > > > Please find it attached. I did notice in it though: > > > > [ 50.508381] [drm:drm_mode_debug_printmodeline] Modeline 27:"1600x1200" 0 202500 1600 1664 1856 2160 1200 1201 1204 1250 0x40 0x5 > > [ 50.508383] [drm:drm_mode_prune_invalid] Not using 1600x1200 mode 15 > > [ 50.508385] [drm:drm_mode_debug_printmodeline] Modeline 28:"1600x1200" 0 189000 1600 1664 1856 2160 1200 1201 1204 1250 0x40 0x5 > > [ 50.508385] [drm:drm_mode_prune_invalid] Not using 1600x1200 mode 15 > > [ 50.508387] [drm:drm_mode_debug_printmodeline] Modeline 66:"1400x1050" 0 179500 1400 1504 1656 1912 1050 1053 1057 1105 0x40 0x6 > > [ 50.508388] [drm:drm_mode_prune_invalid] Not using 1400x1050 mode 15 > > [ 50.508390] [drm:drm_mode_debug_printmodeline] Modeline 71:"1600x1200" 0 175500 1600 1664 1856 2160 1200 1201 1204 1250 0x40 0x5 > > [ 50.508390] [drm:drm_mode_prune_invalid] Not using 1600x1200 mode 15 > > > > Why would it think those modes are invalid? > > 15 = dotclock too high for your chip. Ahhh. So in layman's terms, my nVidia card was better, at least in terms of being able to handle higher dotclocks? That will be a pity if the case. I was sure looking forward to getting rid of this nVidia card. :-( b.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
