[lkml]   [2008]   [May]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [git head] Should X86_PAT really default to yes?

* Frans Pop <> wrote:

> On Friday 02 May 2008, Jesse Barnes wrote:
> > This is just a transient issue during VT switch or server exit though,
> > right? X functionality isn't affected, and your VTs work fine?
> Transient only. I've just tested again and this time the band was
> visible on top of the text on VT1 for about 2 seconds. Then it
> disappeared. The artifacts also appear when I log out from KDE (i.e.
> without exiting the server), and I also get the messages when logging
> out and logging in again.
> I do not see any performance issues, but I've only used this kernel
> for a very short time.
> > If so, it might not be a PAT issue but just a different memory
> > layout or something (and therefore it would really just be a
> > cosmetic bug in the X driver).
> The artifacts may not be a PAT issue directly, but it is a clear
> regression for me as I currently have a nice clean screen when X shuts
> down. I'm also 100% sure that it is caused by enabling PAT. A kernel
> with same config and only PAT disabled does not show the artifacts.

ok, Cc:-ed more folks - this bug has to be resolved regardless of the
default selection.


 \ /
  Last update: 2008-05-04 11:07    [W:0.072 / U:7.808 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site