TC & NVidia

[SeventhSin]

To sum it up, I have the following setups:

1. PC with NVIDIA GeForce GT 740 card only => tce-load -wi graphics-KERNEL : no dmseg messages after "Linux agpgart interface v0.103", screen resolution doesn't change (fail)
2. PC with NVIDIA GeForce GT 430 card only => tce-load -wi graphics-KERNEL : no dmseg messages after "Linux agpgart interface v0.103", screen resolution doesn't change (fail)
3. Laptop with integrated Radeon HD 7640G only => tce-load -wi firmware-radeon graphics-KERNEL : screen resolution changes to max (success)
4. Laptop with integrated Intel HD Graphics 530 AND NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M => tce-load -wi graphics-KERNEL : Intel driver loaded, screen resolution changes to max (success)

Note: tested on Core x86 (bare bone).

[SeventhSin]

Hi SeventhSin
After the screen goes dark, you could try hitting  Ctrl-Alt-F1  to see if it kicks you back into the console.

<ctl-alt-f1> and then "sudo killall Xorg" doesn't work (this would allow you to access the xorg log)?

To be honest I didn't go that far. The lack of dmesg messages suggested to me that there is something the graphics-KERNEL extension doesn't do as expected.

Now, looking at the Xorg log I see that it does the following:

a) it searches for nouveau first => fail
b) it searches for nv => fail
c) it searches for fbdev => fail

It then defaults to vesa apparently.

[Juanito]

Both xf86-video-nv and xf86-video-nouveau are in the repo.

[SeventhSin]

Both xf86-video-nv and xf86-video-nouveau are in the repo.

Just run another battery of tests on the NVIDIA only machines.

tce-load -wi xf86-video-nouveau graphics-KERNEL Xorg-7.7
and
tce-load -wi xf86-video-nv graphics-KERNEL Xorg-7.7

In both cases the appropriate driver seems to be loaded, however following a long list of supported cards, there comes:

...
(WW) NV/Nouveau: Ignoring unsupported device _HEX_DEVICE_ID_GIBBERISG_ at HEX_OFFSET_GIBBERISH
(EE) open /dev/dri/card0: No such file or directory
(WW) Falling back to old probe method for modsetting
(EE) open /dev/dri/card0: No such file or directory
...

And the behavior is the same as before (screen flickering a bit then going black). Basically with or without installing xf86-video-nv|nouveau the end result is the same. If you guys think it's needed, I can SSH into the machines and pull the full Xorg logs. Let me know.

[Juanito]

The “dri/card0” message would disappear with Xorg-7.7-3d, the “unsupported_device” message doesn’t look promising though..

[coreplayer2]

Hello SeventhSin,

Please, you're just chasing your tail here...

Now the truth is coming to light....  You are in fact testing on three different machines with various types of hardware, but as far as I can tell we don't know which architecture you're using (eg:  TC -10 x86 or Tinycorepure64)?

NVIDIA GeForce GT 430
NVIDIA GeForce GT 740
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M

These are all fairly recent Nvidia Video cards which are not supported by either nouveau or nv drivers, these drivers are far too old, forget them.
However, In TC-10 these cards should be supported by the generic Xvesa (in TC-10 x86) and Xorg-7.7 (in TC-10 x86_64, I mean corepure64)

Additionally at least the GeForce GT 740 and GeForce GTX 970M have proprietary Nvidia driver support in TC-9  x86 and corepure64, am not sure about the 430 model

For TC-10 x86
My Geforce GTX 1060 video card at native resolution (and likely yours too) is supported by Xvesa extension
this is my onboot.lst (with personal extensions removed) which supports my Geforce GTX 1060 graphics card (without on chip i915 graphics)

Code: [Select]

fltk-1.3.tcz
freetype.tcz
imlib2-bin.tcz
imlib2.tcz
libfontenc.tcz
libICE.tcz
libjpeg-turbo.tcz
libpng.tcz
libSM.tcz
libX11.tcz
libXau.tcz
libxcb.tcz
libXdmcp.tcz
libXext.tcz
libXfont.tcz
libXrender.tcz
libXt.tcz
Xlibs.tcz
Xprogs.tcz
Xvesa.tcz
wbar.tcz
libXrandr.tcz
libXpm.tcz
libXmu.tcz
libXi.tcz
libnl.tcz
libiw.tcz
aterm.tcz
hackedbox.tcz

For TC-10 x86_64 (tinycorepure64)
I currently use Xorg-7.7 which supports my Geforce GTX 1060 graphics card (without on chip i915 graphics) using this onboot.lst (with personal extensions removed)

Code: [Select]

aterm.tcz
fltk-1.3.tcz
freetype.tcz
glib2.tcz
harfbuzz.tcz
imlib2-bin.tcz
imlib2.tcz
libffi.tcz
libfontenc.tcz
libICE.tcz
libjpeg-turbo.tcz
libpng.tcz
libSM.tcz
libX11.tcz
libXau.tcz
libxcb.tcz
libXdmcp.tcz
libXext.tcz
libXfont.tcz
libXi.tcz
libXmu.tcz
libXpm.tcz
libXrandr.tcz
libXrender.tcz
libXt.tcz
pcre.tcz
wbar.tcz
Xlibs.tcz
Xorg-fonts.tcz
Xprogs.tcz
graphics-4.19.10-tinycore64.tcz
Xorg-7.7.tcz
firmware-rtl_nic.tcz
firmware-iwl8000.tcz
wifi.tcz
pciutils.tcz
hackedbox.tcz
aspell.tcz

Resulting Xorg log

Code: [Select]

[    46.673] (II) Loading /usr/local/lib/xorg/modules/drivers/vesa_drv.so
[    46.674] (II) Module vesa: vendor="X.Org Foundation"
[    46.674] compiled for 1.20.0, module version = 2.4.0
[    46.674] Module class: X.Org Video Driver
[    46.674] ABI class: X.Org Video Driver, version 24.0
[    46.674] (II) modesetting: Driver for Modesetting Kernel Drivers: kms
[    46.674] (II) VESA: driver for VESA chipsets: vesa
[    46.674] (--) using VT number 2

[    46.678] (EE) open /dev/dri/card0: No such file or directory
[    46.678] (WW) Falling back to old probe method for modesetting
[    46.678] (EE) open /dev/dri/card0: No such file or directory
[    46.678] (EE) Screen 0 deleted because of no matching config section.
[    46.678] (II) UnloadModule: "modesetting"
[    46.678] (II) Loading sub module "vbe"
[    46.678] (II) LoadModule: "vbe"
[    46.678] (II) Loading /usr/local/lib/xorg/modules/libvbe.so
[    46.680] (II) Module vbe: vendor="X.Org Foundation"
[    46.680] compiled for 1.20.4, module version = 1.1.0
[    46.680] ABI class: X.Org Video Driver, version 24.0
[    46.680] (II) Loading sub module "int10"
[    46.680] (II) LoadModule: "int10"
[    46.681] (II) Loading /usr/local/lib/xorg/modules/libint10.so
[    46.688] (II) Module int10: vendor="X.Org Foundation"
[    46.688] compiled for 1.20.4, module version = 1.0.0
[    46.688] ABI class: X.Org Video Driver, version 24.0
[    46.688] (II) VESA(0): initializing int10
[    46.689] (II) VESA(0): Primary V_BIOS segment is: 0xc000
[    46.718] (II) VESA(0): VESA BIOS detected
[    46.718] (II) VESA(0): VESA VBE Version 3.0
[    46.718] (II) VESA(0): VESA VBE Total Mem: 16384 kB
[    46.718] (II) VESA(0): VESA VBE OEM: NVIDIA
[    46.718] (II) VESA(0): VESA VBE OEM Software Rev: 134.6
[    46.718] (II) VESA(0): VESA VBE OEM Vendor: NVIDIA Corporation
[    46.718] (II) VESA(0): VESA VBE OEM Product: GP106 Board
[    46.718] (II) VESA(0): VESA VBE OEM Product Rev: Chip Rev   
[    46.767] (II) VESA(0): Creating default Display subsection in Screen section
"Default Screen Section" for depth/fbbpp 24/32
[    46.767] (==) VESA(0): Depth 24, (--) framebuffer bpp 32
[    46.767] (==) VESA(0): RGB weight 888
[    46.767] (==) VESA(0): Default visual is TrueColor
[    46.767] (==) VESA(0): Using gamma correction (1.0, 1.0, 1.0)
[    46.767] (II) Loading sub module "ddc"
[    46.767] (II) LoadModule: "ddc"
[    46.767] (II) Module "ddc" already built-in
[    46.768] (II) VESA(0): VESA VBE DDC supported
[    46.768] (II) VESA(0): VESA VBE DDC Level 2
[    46.768] (II) VESA(0): VESA VBE DDC transfer in appr. 1 sec.
[    46.784] (II) VESA(0): VESA VBE DDC read successfully
[    46.784] (II) VESA(0): Manufacturer: LGD  Model: 46f  Serial#: 0
[    46.784] (II) VESA(0): Year: 2016  Week: 0
[    46.784] (II) VESA(0): EDID Version: 1.4
[    46.784] (II) VESA(0): Digital Display Input
[    46.784] (II) VESA(0): 6 bits per channel
[    46.784] (II) VESA(0): Digital interface is DisplayPort
[    46.784] (II) VESA(0): Max Image Size [cm]: horiz.: 34  vert.: 19
[    46.784] (II) VESA(0): Gamma: 2.20
[    46.784] (II) VESA(0): DPMS capabilities: StandBy Suspend Off
[    46.784] (II) VESA(0): Supported color encodings: RGB 4:4:4 YCrCb 4:4:4
[    46.784] (II) VESA(0): First detailed timing is preferred mode
[    46.784] (II) VESA(0): Preferred mode is native pixel format and refresh rate
[    46.784] (II) VESA(0): redX: 0.640 redY: 0.345   greenX: 0.335 greenY: 0.625
[    46.784] (II) VESA(0): blueX: 0.150 blueY: 0.052   whiteX: 0.313 whiteY: 0.329
[    46.784] (II) VESA(0): Manufacturer's mask: 0
[    46.784] (II) VESA(0): Supported detailed timing:
[    46.784] (II) VESA(0): clock: 138.7 MHz   Image Size:  344 x 194 mm
[    46.784] (II) VESA(0): h_active: 1920  h_sync: 1968  h_sync_end 2000 h_blank_end 2080 h_border: 0
[    46.784] (II) VESA(0): v_active: 1080  v_sync: 1083  v_sync_end 1088 v_blanking: 1111 v_border: 0
[    46.785] (II) VESA(0):  LG Display
[    46.785] (II) VESA(0):  LP156WF6-SPB6
[    46.785] (II) VESA(0): EDID (in hex):
[    46.785] (II) VESA(0): 00ffffffffffff0030e46f0400000000
[    46.785] (II) VESA(0): 001a010495221378eadc95a35855a026
[    46.785] (II) VESA(0): 0d505400000001010101010101010101
[    46.785] (II) VESA(0): 0101010101012e3680a070381f403020
[    46.785] (II) VESA(0): 350058c21000001a0000000000000000
[    46.785] (II) VESA(0): 00000000000000000000000000fe004c
[    46.785] (II) VESA(0): 4720446973706c61790a2020000000fe
[    46.785] (II) VESA(0): 004c503135365746362d535042360076
[    46.785] (II) VESA(0): EDID vendor "LGD", prod id 1135
[    46.785] (II) VESA(0): Printing DDC gathered Modelines:
[    46.785] (II) VESA(0): Modeline "1920x1080"x0.0  138.70  1920 1968 2000 2080  1080 1083 1088 1111 +hsync -vsync (66.7 kHz eP)

For now you can try any of the above

[coreplayer2]

One more thing..   Xfbdev extension works well on Nvidia Geforce GTX 1060 graphics card on TinyCorePure64, don't for get to add the appropriate bootcode (see info file) to load with correct resolution.

[curaga]

xf86-video-nv and the proprietary Nvidia driver will not affect the console resolution, they are both for Xorg only. So that part was expected.
Your cards are too new for xf86-video-nv like coreplayer2 mentions, so you should use the proprietary driver, if/when someone builds it.

[SeventhSin]

Please, you're just chasing your tail here...

That is possible but not very probable. I am in fact well on my way of achieving my initial goal: ascertain if supporting NVIDIA cards on Core is something to be avoided.

Now the truth is coming to light....  You are in fact testing on three different machines with various types of hardware, but as far as I can tell we don't know which architecture you're using (eg:  TC -10 x86 or Tinycorepure64)?

It's ok to miss that (forum threads tend to get swampy), but I do mention in the beginning of the thread and in some subsequent posts that I am testing on Core x86.

NVIDIA GeForce GT 430
NVIDIA GeForce GT 740
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M

These are all fairly recent Nvidia Video cards which are not supported by either nouveau or nv drivers, these drivers are far too old, forget them.

The NVIDIA GeForce GT 430 is almost a decade old. I agree with you that the other two can be considered fairly recent (4-5 years old).

Thank you for the tips and for posting your configs. I'll be referring to these posts in the future if need arises.

I'm not aware of the advantages of Xvesa vs Nouveau. Is it more stable than Nouveau, or more performant, or both? Could you comment on your own experience on the subject?

 

[SeventhSin]

xf86-video-nv and the proprietary Nvidia driver will not affect the console resolution, they are both for Xorg only. So that part was expected.

I wasn't aware of that, thank you @curaga.

Your cards are too new for xf86-video-nv like coreplayer2 mentions, so you should use the proprietary driver, if/when someone builds it.

Yes, the cards not being supported in the current extension incarnations has indeed become salient, due to the input I've been receiving. Thank you again.

[Juanito]

I'm not aware of the advantages of Xvesa vs Nouveau. Is it more stable than Nouveau, or more performant, or both? Could you comment on your own experience on the subject?

Xvesa is a tiny x server, less performant than Xorg and nothing to do with the nouveau driver

[coreplayer2]

Hello SeventhSin

It's ok to miss that (forum threads tend to get swampy), but I do mention in the beginning of the thread and in some subsequent posts that I am testing on Core x86.

There's a lot of confusion here because while you've mentions once or twice "testing on core"  your first post asked for support for AMD and Nvidia Graphics drivers.  For many folks Core if often used as a starting platform to build a system with a desktop.

Hello,
Core-current (10.x, 32 bit)

For the most part Core runs in the frame buffer and is hardware independent.     Unless you have other intentions full 3D graphic support for all the above hardware is not required.  Otherwise it's better to compile the proprietary driver and extract only the required components for your specific usage.

Maybe better to state your goals?

[coreplayer2]

The NVIDIA GeForce GT 430 is almost a decade old. I agree with you that the other two can be considered fairly recent

[emoji112]

At its best the Nouveau open source driver was quite unreliable back 15+ years ago..

If you really need an NVIDIA driver there’s some good news, as a recent NVIDIA GeForce 390.87 driver appears to support all your NVIDIA hardware.

https://www.geforce.com/drivers/results/137275

The latest driver doesn’t support the GT 430
 Video card

Will attempt to build the 390.87 driver for TC-10


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[SeventhSin]

I'm not aware of the advantages of Xvesa vs Nouveau. Is it more stable than Nouveau, or more performant, or both? Could you comment on your own experience on the subject?

Xvesa is a tiny x server, less performant than Xorg and nothing to do with the nouveau driver

I wrote that in a hurry and now that I'm able to glance again over my post, it does indeed look like a horrendous choice of words. Yes, XVesa is a tiny X server which "talks" to hardware via one driver only (the so called Vesa Bios Extension) as opposite to the more modular Xorg who can "talk" to hardware via multiple drivers.

What I meant was: how does Xvesa (Vesa BIOS Extensions) fare versus Xorg (with Nouveau as driver of choice).

[SeventhSin]

For the most part Core runs in the frame buffer and is hardware independent.     Unless you have other intentions full 3D graphic support for all the above hardware is not required.  Otherwise it's better to compile the proprietary driver and extract only the required components for your specific usage.

Maybe better to state your goals?

Yes, you are right, I should state my goals more clearly. Have to run now, but I'll post tomorrow with a couple of clarifications.