Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 39

Thread: NVIDIA's 302 Linux Driver Finally Has RandR 1.2/1.3

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    59

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by asdx View Post
    But still, no KMS, no plans to support Wayland...
    So when is wayland going to be stable? You know so there is something to target. I also thought that wayland could use Xorg drivers?

    How would KMS be helpful without an in-kernel driver?

    As much as I keep hoping nvidia open-sources their driver, it's not going to happen and that one that i can't spell or be bothered to look up, doesn't work so well on gentoo 64bit multilib (with 32bit wine) and doesn't really work well for gaming.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    1,481

    Default

    I wonder if nvidia intends to add in some of the new gaming features that the Windows version picked up recently.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    42

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gusar View Post
    You were writing as if it was impossible for them to do so, as if there's a technical limitation or something. But they could do it, and they don't need KMS for it.

    But why? They don't need to, to provide the things people want when they say "we want KMS".

    xrandr is a bit different, it can do something twinview wasn't capable of - rotating just one display in a multi-display scenario. But besides that I'm not aware of any limitations twinview had, other than needing nvidia's tools to set it up, as opposed to using standard xrandr tools.
    To add to that, well I'm pretty sure KMS is GPL, not LGPL, so there's likely licensing issues. As for another method, I doubt Nvidia wants to put in the effort for something non-critical. I'm sure if Linux becomes more popular, or Nvidia has some other incentive, then they'll probably do something about it.

    I would concur that focusing on things such as critical issues, bugs and xrandr support seems like time better spent

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    719

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gusar View Post
    You were writing as if it was impossible for them to do so, as if there's a technical limitation or something. But they could do it, and they don't need KMS for it.
    Badly worded, perhaps. I wasn't saying it was impossible for Nvidia to fix - I was saying it was impossible to do certain things without them fixing it.

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Estonia
    Posts
    141

    Default

    i wonder if this driver fixes the issue of powermizer being in full 3d clocks when 2 screens are operating.
    when disabling one powermizer started to work normally.

  6. #26
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    1,481

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by xpander View Post
    i wonder if this driver fixes the issue of powermizer being in full 3d clocks when 2 screens are operating.
    when disabling one powermizer started to work normally.
    I don't have that problem when both screens are the same resolution and refresh rate.

    When my monitors were different resolutions, it was locked at the max. But that was the same in Windows 7 too.

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    352

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by johnc View Post
    I wonder if nvidia intends to add in some of the new gaming features that the Windows version picked up recently.
    like what?

    I've opened a thread regarding ViewPortIn/Out here: http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=179892

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    363

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by xpander View Post
    i wonder if this driver fixes the issue of powermizer being in full 3d clocks when 2 screens are operating.
    when disabling one powermizer started to work normally.
    That's a hardware issue. Generally, the memory clock cannot be easily changed without flickering if multiple screens are connected, and the driver defaults to the fastest clock due to that.

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    444

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by brent View Post
    That's a hardware issue. Generally, the memory clock cannot be easily changed without flickering if multiple screens are connected, and the driver defaults to the fastest clock due to that.
    Ah, so that's the reason? I always thought it's bandwidth issues. For example, on my laptop I have to force the card into it's lowest performance level, and when using TV-out (S-Video), the tv screen would go blank every few seconds. This wasn't the case when I could still operate the card in higher performance levels.

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    76

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gusar View Post
    Ah, so that's the reason? I always thought it's bandwidth issues. For example, on my laptop I have to force the card into it's lowest performance level, and when using TV-out (S-Video), the tv screen would go blank every few seconds. This wasn't the case when I could still operate the card in higher performance levels.
    The display controllers are isochronous clients of the memory controller, so you can not change the frequency of the memory while the dc does the scanout without distorting pixels on the screen. So to reclock memory you have to wait until the display is in VBlank and do the reclocking in this short timeslice. As soon as you connect two monitors, which always have a slightly different scanout rate (maybe just because of circuit tolerances) the two VBlank periods practically never sync up, so you have no chance to reclock memory without distorting the content of at least one screen. So the driver just goes to the highest mem clock and stays there, to work around this issue.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •