opensuse v11.3
linux 2.6.34.7-0.3-desktop x86_64
The most recent update that produced the kernel version above is bit of a disaster for me. The open source radeon driver does not work with VirtualBox (it crashes at startup), and the ATI fglrx driver either builds without acceleration (or the X server loads it that way?) or fails to build.
Is there a way to undo some (or all, if necessary) of the update?
This appears to happen all over the place (seen Debian reports from the 18th, Ubuntu on the same day as we got the update also). It appears the kernel got some cleanups made on the ASM code and it broke ATI installer. So lets wait until ATI fixes their stuff, hopefully in the next release, till then, you have hammer your kernel sources a bit, which seems to me a better choice than rolling back to kernel that has 2 critical security holes.
Hopefully soon it will be fixed by ATI.
I recommend thinking about a backup strategy for the future.
A quick fix is provided here. If you do this yourself, you may have to get creative in finding the appropriate <compat.h> to modify although it all starts in </usr/src/linux/…>.
After adding the missing function, the custom driver compiled normally with only the usual warnings. And works exceptionally well. It has none of the problems I saw with the generic build.
On 2010-09-25 19:36, jimoe666 wrote:
>
> opensuse v11.3
> linux 2.6.34.7-0.3-desktop x86_64
>
> The most recent update that produced the kernel version above is bit of
> a disaster for me. The open source radeon driver does not work with
> VirtualBox (it crashes at startup), and the ATI fglrx driver either
> builds without acceleration (or the X server loads it that way?) or
> fails to build.
Have a look at this thread:
<http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse/2010-09/msg01471.html>
–
Cheers / Saludos,
Carlos E. R.
(from 11.2 x86_64 “Emerald” at Telcontar)
Thanks. That was enlightening. I did find a similar solution elsewhere and built a custom driver that works for all our workstations, with acceleration and no flickery artifacts.
On 2010-09-26 09:06, jimoe666 wrote:
>
> Carlos E. R.;2228275 Wrote:
>> On 2010-09-25 19:36, jimoe666 wrote:> The most recent update that
>> produced the kernel version above is bit of a disaster for me…
>> Have a look at this thread:
>> <http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse/2010-09/msg01471.html>
>>
> Thanks. That was enlightening. I did find a similar solution elsewhere
> and built a custom driver that works for all our workstations, with
> acceleration and no flickery artifacts.
The one you said of ubuntu forums, editing
“/usr/src/linux-headers-2.6.32-24-generic/arch/x86/include/asm/compat.h”? (That’s the kernel, not
the driver, by the way).
If it is another one, post the link, for use by other people.
–
Cheers / Saludos,
Carlos E. R.
(from 11.2 x86_64 “Emerald” at Telcontar)
Yes, the Ubuntu posting.
Yes, it is patching the kernel code.
The patch of the fglrx driver code does not work for me since the code is overwritten from the rpm package every time the package is built. If there were a way to patch the code in the RPM package…?
On 2010-09-26 23:06, jimoe666 wrote:
>
> Carlos E. R.;2228561 Wrote:
>> The one you said of ubuntu forums, editing
>> “/usr/src/linux-headers-2.6.32-24-generic/arch/x86/include/asm/compat.h”?
>> (That’s the kernel, not the driver, by the way).
> Yes, the Ubuntu posting.
>
> Yes, it is patching the kernel code.
>
> The patch of the fglrx driver code does not work for me since the code
> is overwritten from the rpm package every time the package is built. If
> there were a way to patch the code in the RPM package…?
Dunno.
In the opensuse mail list they mention patching the driver somehow, and that patching the kernel in
that way is “illegal”.
I don’t do either, as I don’t have an ATI card 
I’ll ask in the mail list.
There is also a very interesting post by Linus Torvalds himself, of four years ago, where he showed
very much against this license crap.
<http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/12/13/370>
Maybe he lost 
:-?
–
Cheers / Saludos,
Carlos E. R.
(from 11.2 x86_64 “Emerald” at Telcontar)
On 2010-09-27 02:53, Carlos E. R. wrote:
> On 2010-09-26 23:06, jimoe666 wrote:
…
> I’ll ask in the mail list.
I got an answer:
·····
Why are they rebuilding the package at all? It is not needed! The binary
driver they already have will work without being rebuilt!
> > Can somebody post complete instructions? Here, in our forum, or in the
> > wiki, please?
cd /usr/src/kernel-modules/fglrx
apply the above-mentioned patch
make
make install
·····
Does that work?
He says that there is no need to rebuild the package, is that correct?
–
Cheers / Saludos,
Carlos E. R.
(from 11.2 x86_64 “Emerald” at Telcontar)
On Mon, 27 Sep 2010 02:33:56 GMT, “Carlos E. R.” <robin.listas@localhost>
wrote:
>On 2010-09-27 02:53, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>> On 2010-09-26 23:06, jimoe666 wrote:
>
>…
>
>> I’ll ask in the mail list.
>
>I got an answer:
>
>·····
>Why are they rebuilding the package at all? It is not needed! The binary
>driver they already have will work without being rebuilt!
>
>> > Can somebody post complete instructions? Here, in our forum, or in the
>> > wiki, please?
>cd /usr/src/kernel-modules/fglrx
>apply the above-mentioned patch
>make
>make install
>·····
>
>
>Does that work?
>He says that there is no need to rebuild the package, is that correct?
On my computers oS 11.1 KDE3.5 i have never had to rebuild anything for my
ATI video drivers. A couple of years now. I think the last time i did
that was for oS 9.2, or maybe early oS 10.3.
Yes, it does. It’s both pleasant and annoying to have the obvious pointed out.