[gentoo-amd64] Re: Radeon driver update

[Duncan]

"Mark Haney" <mhaney@××××××××××××.org> posted
495B8F03.7050501@××××××××××××.org, excerpted below, on  Wed, 31 Dec 2008
10:25:55 -0500:

> Duncan wrote:
>> "Mark Haney" <mhaney@××××××××××××.org> posted
>> 495B5F9B.2000902@××××××××××××.org, excerpted below, on  Wed, 31 Dec
>> 2008 07:03:39 -0500:
>>
>>> I updated the xf86-ati-driver package late yesterday and now my fonts
>>> are all screwed up.  My text is really big compared to what it was
>>> before.  I thought maybe xorg.conf was re-written but it looks fine to
>>> me.  As it is, my system is usable but not comfortably so.  So what
>>> the devil have I done to it?
>>
>> Knowing the version now... and in cases like this, the version
>> before... often helps...
>
> I was running 6.6.3 and then updated to 6.8.0-r1.  I'm not running
> ~amd64.  I'm not running any Xorg overlays, just plain jane Xorg.  This
> system is a laptop, so the config has been set (and working) for well
> over 2 years now.

OK.  IIRC 6.6.x was pre-RandR support.  When I upgraded from that I had a 
LOT of reconfiguring to do here, but most of that was due to the dual-
head setup I use.

That's a pretty big jump, a LOT of stuff changed in how it manages 
things, and your best bet may be to almost start from scratch with your 
xorg.conf -- except that you can still crib some settings from the old 
one when trying to setup the new one.

FWIW there's some changes in xorg-server too, but it looks like 1.3.x is 
stable there and 1.5.x is ~arch, and my memory is fuzzier on what changes 
were in which versions, there, altho you could always check the upstream 
release announcements and/or changelogs.

Anyway, just for kicks, I'd see just how good xorg is at detecting and 
setting up /everything/ on its own -- from the CLI, try renaming 
xorg.conf so xorg detects everything dynamically and see how good (or 
bad, as the case may be) it actually does detecting and setting up 
everything on its own, dynamically.  That's the ultimate goal with all 
this RandR and hotplug detection stuff.  It may or may not be actually 
there yet on your system, but it's actually practical to consider it now, 
where it wasn't, previously.  

With a laptop, it's likely you'll have some special-function keys you 
want setup so you may want an xorg.conf at least for that, but with newer 
xorg and hal and the appropriate xevents input drivers (xf86-input-evdev, 
possibly xf86-input-evtouch if the laptop has a touchpad mouse) compiled, 
you may not even need that!  It's worth trying anyway -- but as I said, 
ensure you have evdev/evtouch compiled for hal to try, or input isn't 
likely to work right.

If it doesn't work, do consider trying it again when you next upgrade 
xorg-server.  As I said, they're making pretty big strides in the area 
right now, and xorg.conf-less dynamic config is actually possible on at 
least some hardware, now.

>> FWIW, xf86-video-ati-6.9.0 here, on ~amd64

>> As to the problem, what sort of monitor(s) are you running and do you
>> have its dimensions set?
>
> The dimensions look like they are set correctly (1280x800):

I'm sorry, I meant physical display dimensions, Xmm Ymm, so xorg can 
calculate DPI on its own, or DPI directly (if you set it in your DE).

> (II) RADEON(0): Supported additional Video Mode:
> (II) RADEON(0): clock: 68.9 MHz   Image Size:  331 x 207 mm
> (II) RADEON(0): h_active: 1280  h_sync: 1296  h_sync_end 1344
> h_blank_end 1408 h_border: 0
> (II) RADEON(0): v_active: 800  v_sync: 801  v_sync_end 804 v_blanking:
> 816 v_border: 0

OK, as you can see there, for that mode at least, your dimensions would 
be 331 x 207 mm, so you could set in your monitor section:

DisplaySize 331 207

>
> I had to setup a 'Modeline' that corresponded to the correct dimension
> of my monitor back when I first setup gentoo on this laptop.

Even if an entirely xorg.conf-less setup doesn't work, you will want to 
try commenting your modeline, to see if xorg gets it right on its own, 
now.  With dual monitors, it doesn't, at least here, but it does seem to 
detect and setup just one monitor correctly, here.  If you are lucky...

> I don't think I've setup a standard DPI or display size in my xorg.conf
> file.  I don't recall doing so and I"ve not touched that config file in
> over a year.  How/where do I do that in xorg.conf?

See the xorg.conf manpage for the details, especially since they may be 
differences between the arch-stable xorg-server-1.3.x you are likely 
running and the ~arch xorg-server-1.5.x I'm running, but it should be a 
line like the DisplaySize line above (you can indent it as needed), 
either in your Monitor section, or possibly in that old an xorg-server, 
elsewhere.  (After a quick check, the oldest xorg-server for which I 
still have a binpkg is 1.4.0.90-r3.  It lists DisplaySize in the Monitor 
section as 1.5.x does, so the new location.  But of course that's a 1.5 
prerelease.  Whether it was in the monitor or some other section clear 
back in 1.3... well, check your xorg.conf manpage and see.)

One cautionary note:  Since it wasn't set before, who knows what strange 
defaults xorg may have chosen?  You adjusted your font sizes to it and 
they now seem normal, even if they are badly skewed because the DPI 
wasn't correct.  If that's the case, the correct DPI/DisplaySize will NOT 
look right until you adjust font sizes to match, since they were so badly 
skewed before.  In that case, you have a choice.  You can either adjust 
all your font sizes to correct them, or you can deliberately give xorg a 
bad displaysize line to match what it was before.  Giving it a bad 
displaysize line would be easier short term, but you're likely to have 
continuing problems with various apps and upgrades until you get it set 
correctly, after which /most/ of the problems should go away, tho there 
will always be the strange corner-cases that must be compensated for 
manually.

FWIW, plugging 331 mm and 207 mm into units (a CLI conversion tool, 
nice... might be worth merging if you don't have it), I get ~13.03 inches 
and ~8.15 inches.  Doing the math 1280 px / 13.03 inches, 800 px / 8.15 
inches , that's roughly 98x98 DPI (dots per inch, pixels per inch).  
96x96 DPI is one of the common standard values (sometimes referred to as 
100 DPI, as seen for example in the xorg font names), so that's what I'd 
guess your physical monitor uses when set correctly.  The two other 
common values I've seen are 75 DPI (old, but see for instance the 75 DPI 
xorg fonts) and 120 DPI.

If you have your old xorg log files or your old xf86-video-ati and 
perhaps xorg-server packages binpkged (as you likely will if you run 
FEATURES=buildpkg)to downgrade temporarily to and check the log file, it 
should list the DPI it was using in the log file.  You can of course see 
what the current config is using in the current logfile, and compare them 
to that 96 or 100 DPI that I calculated, to see whether your old setup or 
your new setup is closer to what the actual physical hardware DPI is.

FWIW here (note that different xorg versions log somewhat different 
formats and information):

(II) RADEON(0): Output VGA-0 using initial mode 1920x1200
(II) RADEON(0): Output DVI-0 using initial mode 1920x1200
after xf86InitialConfiguration
(**) RADEON(0): Display dimensions: (520, 320) mm
(**) RADEON(0): DPI set to (93, 190)

That's using the following in my xorg.conf:
DisplaySize     518.4    648             # both monitors

Again, that's with dual monitors, and xorg is screwing that bit up.  I 
have my two (identical) monitors stacked, so had to double the vertical 
size, so half it here to get actual.  Actual DPI it therefore ~93x95, or 
pretty close to the 96x96 standard -- definitely closer to it than either 
120x120 or 75x75, anyway.

-- 
Duncan - List replies preferred.   No HTML msgs.
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your master."  Richard Stallman