ATI Radeon 9550 (almost working?)

[jacksmash]

Hi,

I'm happy to have found this forum!

Anyways... I've tried installing the drivers from the ATI site (btw... why is "x86_64" always part of the installer file even when you don't specify 64-bit?).

The install process runs smoothly (thanks to help I've found searching this forum, and partha's website). But after I run 'aticonfig --initial', I get this when running fglrxinfo:


Xlib: extension "XFree86-DRI" missing on display ":0.0".
display: :0.0 screen: 0
OpenGL vendor string: Mesa project: www.mesa3d.org
OpenGL renderer string: Mesa GLX Indirect
OpenGL version string: 1.2 (1.5 Mesa 6.5.1)


So, although I didn't get any errors whatsoever during the install, it's clear that the ATI drivers are not being used.

Also, when I reboot my computer X doesn't start... and so I do a rescue to change the xorg.conf file so I can get X started again.

Any suggestions?

[jacksmash]

Ok... I tried a reinstall, and now I'm having more serious problems. When I try to run something simple like aterm I get this error:

aterm: error while loading shared libraries: /usr/lib/xorg/libGL.so.1: cannot restore segment prot after reloc: Permission denied


Should I just stop while I'm ahead?

Cheers.

[Michael]

The ATI installer uses a combined 32-bit and 64-bit package. The driver will work whether your using i386 or x86_64 Linux.

As far as your problems go, how are you installing the drivers? Are you using a buildpkg command or the graphical interface? The GUI path won't work on newer distributions.

What Linux distribution are you using?

[jacksmash]

Thanks for responding.

I'm using FC6 (i686), just reinstalled the latest kernel today.

From the command line:

./ati-drivername-.run --buildpkg Fedora/FC6

That's what I used.

[Michael]

Output of:

cat /var/log/Xorg.0.log | grep EE

[jacksmash]

cat /var/log/Xorg.0.log | grep EE

(WW) warning, (EE) error, (NI) not implemented, (??) unknown.
(II) Loading extension MIT-SCREEN-SAVER
(EE) AIGLX: Screen 0 is not DRI capable
(EE) AIGLX: Screen 1 is not DRI capable


I noticed you moved this to the AMD/ATI thread. You'll have to forgive me if I'm a complete idiot... but do these drivers only work with AMD?

I got the x86_64 ones working with my radeon xpress 200M on my laptop no problem (AMD 64). But what I'm working on now in my desktop, and it's Intel (not by choice!).

[Michael]

AMD bought out ATI. They are the AMD drivers.

Aha, that output makes it an easy fix.

Make sure you have:

Section "Extensions"
Option "Composite" "Off"
Option "AIGLX" "Off"
EndSection

In your xorg.conf.

[jacksmash]

Hmm... I did have that at one point, but I'll try it again.

Basically, since X didn't start, I let it try to start itself with a default configuration.

So then i tried to do the install process again by doing a

yum remove ATI-fglrx

but when I try to install the rpms again, it says that the 'package kernel-module-ATI-fglrx-2.6.blahblah.. is already installed.

So I tried a rpm -e on that specific rpm, but then it tells me that it isn't installed!

I must be losing it. But basically I have to do the install again anyways.

[jacksmash]

Do you know how I can start over without having to reinstall fc6?

[Michael]

You could reinstall them with --force argument.

[jacksmash]

Ok, I really appreciate your patience here.

I reinstalled with --force. And then I ran:
aticonfig --initial --input=/etc/X11/xorg.conf

Now when I run fglrxinfo I get this:

fglrxinfo: error while loading shared libraries: /usr/lib/xorg/libGL.so.1: cannot restore segment prot after reloc: Permission denied

I have no idea what that is, or what to do about it.

Also, I'm afraid to reboot because i'm 99% sure x will not start again, simply because what I'm seeing here is what I saw before.

Any ideas?

[Michael]

Hmmm I don't believe I have ever run into that issue before. Does /usr/lib/xorg/libGL.so.1 exist? If so, then try running fglrx info as root and see.

[jacksmash]

Do you mean remove it and then run fglrxinfo? I'm not sure if that's what you meant - and I don't want to do it if I shouldn't.


ls -l /usr/lib/xorg/libGL.so*
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 26 Mar 7 12:43 /usr/lib/xorg/libGL.so -> /usr/lib/xorg/libGL.so.1.2
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 26 Mar 7 12:43 /usr/lib/xorg/libGL.so.1 -> /usr/lib/xorg/libGL.so.1.2
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 783353 Mar 7 12:43 /usr/lib/xorg/libGL.so.1.2

[jacksmash]

Ok, I took a chance (I could always recreate the link). Now I can run fglrxinfo, and I get this:


# fglrxinfo

Xlib: extension "XFree86-DRI" missing on display ":0.0".
display: :0.0 screen: 0
OpenGL vendor string: Mesa project: www.mesa3d.org
OpenGL renderer string: Mesa GLX Indirect
OpenGL version string: 1.2 (1.5 Mesa 6.5.1)

[jacksmash]

Here's my xorg at this point:



# Xorg configuration created by system-config-display

Section "ServerLayout"
Identifier "Multihead layout"
Screen 0 "aticonfig-Screen[0]" 0 0
InputDevice "Keyboard0" "CoreKeyboard"
Option "Xinerama" "on"
Option "Clone" "off"
EndSection

Section "Files"
EndSection

Section "Module"
EndSection

Section "InputDevice"
Identifier "Keyboard0"
Driver "kbd"
Option "XkbModel" "pc105"
Option "XkbLayout" "us"
EndSection

Section "Monitor"

### Comment all HorizSync and VertSync values to use DDC:
### Comment all HorizSync and VertSync values to use DDC:
Identifier "Monitor1"
VendorName "Monitor Vendor"
ModelName "LCD Panel 1280x1024"
HorizSync 31.5 - 67.0
VertRefresh 50.0 - 75.0
Option "dpms"
EndSection

Section "Monitor"

### Comment all HorizSync and VertSync values to use DDC:
Identifier "Monitor1"
VendorName "Monitor Vendor"
ModelName "LCD Panel 1280x1024"
HorizSync 31.5 - 67.0
VertRefresh 50.0 - 75.0
Option "dpms"
EndSection

Section "Monitor"
Identifier "aticonfig-Monitor[0]"
Option "VendorName" "ATI Proprietary Driver"
Option "ModelName" "Generic Autodetecting Monitor"
Option "DPMS" "true"
EndSection

Section "Device"
Identifier "Videocard0"
Driver "radeon"
EndSection

Section "Device"
Identifier "Videocard1"
Driver "radeon"
VendorName "Videocard Vendor"
BoardName "ATI Technologies Inc RV350 AS [Radeon 9550]"
BusID "PCI:1:0:0"
Screen 1
EndSection

Section "Device"
Identifier "aticonfig-Device[0]"
Driver "fglrx"
EndSection

Section "Screen"
Identifier "Screen0"
Device "Videocard0"
DefaultDepth 24
SubSection "Display"
Viewport 0 0
Depth 24
EndSubSection
EndSection

Section "Screen"
Identifier "Screen1"
Device "Videocard1"
Monitor "Monitor1"
DefaultDepth 24
SubSection "Display"
Viewport 0 0
Depth 24
Modes "1280x1024"
EndSubSection
EndSection

Section "Screen"
Identifier "aticonfig-Screen[0]"
Device "aticonfig-Device[0]"
Monitor "aticonfig-Monitor[0]"
DefaultDepth 24
SubSection "Display"
Viewport 0 0
Depth 24
EndSubSection
EndSection

Section "Extensions"
Option "Composite" "Off"
Option "AIGLX" "Off"
EndSection

[jacksmash]

Looking in my xorg file, I'm wondering why I have 3 device sections? Should I change the lines with 'radeon' to 'fglrx' ??

[Michael]

Those radeon sections aren't being referenced so you could actually remove them, but are fine staying there.

Did you try eliminating the Xinerama line and then getting it running first in a single head config?

[jacksmash]

Alright, I'm fooling around with it with just using single head mode. Now fglrxinfo is giving the tungsten graphics output.

I'm really at a loss here. Perhaps I won't worry about hardware acceleration.

[Michael]

Well the 9550 is supported by the open-source drivers, so you could get by without fglrx and instead using the open-source ones working by default.

[jacksmash]

yeah - doesn't matter what I do... X server always crashes at boot. I have to rescue and start over each time.

[jacksmash]

Well the 9550 is supported by the open-source drivers, so you could get by without fglrx and instead using the open-source ones working by default.


You mean just what gets installed during the install of FC6? Yeah, I'll probably just live with that. I'm not gaming or anything - I just like to learn. But I've been spending too long on this (much more than just today).

Cheers.

[jacksmash]

Just a last shot in the dark... but I have done an update of everything on my system (ie. yum update), just the kernel and some various packages. That wouldn't have any effect... would it?

[Michael]

As long as you installed the drivers again AFTER running the updates, it shouldn't break or adversely effect anything.

[jacksmash]

Hmmm... I misworded that question. I meant that I hadn't done any major updates yet (except for the kernel). But I think I can tell from your response that it doesn't matter either way.

Maybe tomorrow I will reinstall and give it one more go... because from what I've read I really should be able to get this to work.