FC9 Intel 865G wont do 1600x1200

[danespen]

I have Mandriva 10 installed on this machine. I recently installed FC 9 and it picked the "intel" driver instead of the "i810" it used for Mandriva.

I've had this machine running at 1600x1200 but FC 9 refuses to go that high.

The GUI only offers the choices of 1024x768 and lower.
xrandr shows more choices but nothing higher.

The only thing relevant I see in the Xorg.0.log is:

(II) intel(0): Using fuzzy aspect match for initial modes
(II) intel(0): Output VGA using initial mode 1024x768
(II) intel(0): detected 128 kB GTT.
(II) intel(0): detected 892 kB stolen memory.

How do I get the "intel" driver to use a higher resolution.
The video card is an onboard:

82865G Integrated Graphics Controller rev 2

[pwca]

Please post contents of: /etc/X11/xorg.conf

[danespen]

I read that the Intel driver doesn't use much from the xorg.conf. There are no mode lines or modes listed:

# Xorg configuration created by system-config-display

Section "ServerLayout"
Identifier "single head configuration"
Screen 0 "Screen0" 0 0
InputDevice "Mouse0" "CorePointer"
InputDevice "Keyboard0" "CoreKeyboard"
EndSection

Section "Files"
FontPath "catalogue:/etc/X11/fontpath.d"
FontPath "built-ins"
EndSection

Section "Module"
Load "xtrap"
Load "extmod"
Load "glx"
Load "dri"
Load "dbe"
Load "GLcore"
Load "dri2"
EndSection

Section "InputDevice"
Identifier "Keyboard0"
Driver "kbd"
EndSection

Section "InputDevice"
Identifier "Mouse0"
Driver "mouse"
Option "Protocol" "auto"
Option "Device" "/dev/input/mice"
Option "ZAxisMapping" "4 5 6 7"
EndSection

Section "Monitor"
Identifier "Monitor0"
VendorName "Monitor Vendor"
ModelName "Monitor Model"
EndSection

Section "Device"

### Available Driver options are:-
### Values: <i>: integer, <f>: float, <bool>: "True"/"False",
### <string>: "String", <freq>: "<f> Hz/kHz/MHz"
### [arg]: arg optional
#Option "NoAccel" # [<bool>]
#Option "SWcursor" # [<bool>]
#Option "ColorKey" # <i>
#Option "CacheLines" # <i>
#Option "Dac6Bit" # [<bool>]
#Option "DRI" # [<bool>]
#Option "NoDDC" # [<bool>]
#Option "ShowCache" # [<bool>]
#Option "XvMCSurfaces" # <i>
#Option "PageFlip" # [<bool>]
Identifier "Card0"
Driver "intel"
VendorName "Intel Corporation"
BoardName "82865G Integrated Graphics Controller"
BusID "PCI:0:2:0"
EndSection

Section "Screen"
Identifier "Screen0"
Device "Card0"
Monitor "Monitor0"
DefaultDepth 16
SubSection "Display"
Viewport 0 0
Depth 1
EndSubSection
SubSection "Display"
Viewport 0 0
Depth 4
EndSubSection
SubSection "Display"
Viewport 0 0
Depth 8
EndSubSection
SubSection "Display"
Viewport 0 0
Depth 15
EndSubSection
SubSection "Display"
Viewport 0 0
Depth 16
EndSubSection
SubSection "Display"
Viewport 0 0
Depth 24
Modes "800x600"
EndSubSection
EndSection

[Hlingler]

(1) Mandriva 10 and Fedora 9 do not necessarily use the same release of X11/Xorg.
(2) In F9, driver "i810" is just a sym-link to driver "intel".
(3) Acceleration method and other factors may affect available screen resolution(s) and refresh rate(s).
(4) Modes and modelines are optional, not required.

V

P.S. Post contents of xorg.conf here, and upload /var/log/Xorg.0.log to pastebin.com and post link here.

[danespen]

Hi,

I edited my xorg.conf into the prior message, did an upload here (but wasn't clear where it went), and just put it on pastebin.com using my name (danespen).

I did make one attempt at using i810 (it was a choice in the GUI) but X wouldn't come up at all when I did that.

[Hlingler]

I can't access the pastebin.com info as I don't know how/where to put your name.

BACK UP your xorg.conf file, then edit to:
> remove (or comment out) the entire "Files" section - it's not needed and specifying the wrong/incomplete info could bork it.
> remove (or comment out) the entire "Modules" section - it's not needed and specifying the wrong/incomplete info could bork it.
> edit "Screen" section as follows:

Section "Screen"
        Identifier "Screen0"
        Device "Card0"
        Monitor "Monitor0"
        SubSection "Display"
                Viewport 0 0
                Depth 24
        EndSubSection
EndSection

Re-start X. See what happens. Lots more to try if that fails.

V

[danespen]

I'll try it, but I think my config has essentially the same thing. This is my work machine so I can't try it until monday.

I've put the xorg.conf file here:

http://mysite.verizon.net/despen/xorg.conf.txt

[Hlingler]

Yes, I saw the xorg.conf in Post #3, but I was hoping to look at /var/log/Xorg.0.log to see if any good info in there....

V

[danespen]

Xorg.0.log here:

http://mysite.verizon.net/despen/Xorg.0.log.txt

[Hlingler]

You should also update to a modern kernel - this one was released in the Jurassic Age:

Current Operating System: Linux dane-2.cc.telcordia.com 2.6.25-14.fc9.i686 #1 SMP Thu May 1 06:28:41 EDT 2008 i686

I have: 2.6.27.5-41.fc9.i686

In fact, you should do a complete system software update.

V

P.S> The X11R7.4/Xorg-1.5 Window System released with F9 was not finished at the time, and was... less than adequate for normal use. Updating should fix a lot of stuff.

[danespen]

The new kernel is already there. I didn't expect it to do anything to the video driver. I'll reboot and test again Monday.

[Hlingler]

Ah, OK, I see. Well, as long as all other software was updated, I don't see why the new kernel should affect this either, but....

Good Luck,
V

[danespen]

<<P.S> The X11R7.4/Xorg-1.5 Window System released with F9 was not finished at the time, and was... less than adequate for normal use. Updating should fix a lot of stuff.>>

Well, I worked at getting this problem fixed for quite a while and finally applied all the updates and restarted X windows. (I was at run-level 3).

Your comment doesn't give me a good feeling. Neither did the GUI which identified this driver as "experimental". When I click on the hardware tab it doesn't recognize the display either. I opened that dialog and told it I have a 1600x1200 CRT but that didn't help either, the video card part of the GUI still offered the lower resolution.

I'm not married to the idea of FC9. Is FC10 any better or should I be thinking of some other distro? The only reason I leaned toward Fedora is that I also admin a few RH servers at work.

What would really help is some tool or setting that would show what this driver is doing that tells it it doesn't have higher resolutions available.

[Hlingler]

Originally Posted by danespen

<<P.S> The X11R7.4/Xorg-1.5 Window System released with F9 was not finished at the time, and was... less than adequate for normal use. Updating should fix a lot of stuff.>>

Well, I worked at getting this problem fixed for quite a while and finally applied all the updates and restarted X windows. (I was at run-level 3).

OK, and the results were... ?

Originally Posted by danespen

Your comment doesn't give me a good feeling. Neither did the GUI which identified this driver as "experimental". When I click on the hardware tab it doesn't recognize the display either. I opened that dialog and told it I have a 1600x1200 CRT but that didn't help either, the video card part of the GUI still offered the lower resolution.

My comment was meant to drive home the point that software updates were required, but you then responded that you are 100% up-to-date, so that's taken care of. The "experimental" driver is probably the "experimental" modesetting stuff, or maybe the Acceleration Method (EXA versus XAA). You may be able to force legacy driver mode(s) - I alluded to this when I said "other things yet to try". The "hardware tab" I assume refers to system-config-display ("Display Manager"), and there does seem to be some problems/regression with hardware detection, but this is not really a problem, since generic settings will do. Available screen resolutions depend on several factors, the driver and available VRAM being most important.

Originally Posted by danespen

I'm not married to the idea of FC9. Is FC10 any better or should I be thinking of some other distro? The only reason I leaned toward Fedora is that I also admin a few RH servers at work.

If you are not commited to F9, I think a try at F10 might be a "Good Idea™©®".

Originally Posted by danespen

What would really help is some tool or setting that would show what this driver is doing that tells it it doesn't have higher resolutions available.

That tool would be xrandr. The Xorg.0.log shows why other resolutions were disallowed.

V

[danespen]

<<OK, and the results were... ?>>

The results of updating was no improvement, the log I posted was after the update and restart of X but before a reboot.

<<That tool would be *xrandr*. The Xorg.0.log shows why other resolutions were disallowed.>>

All the Xorg log shows that appears important is:

(II) intel(0): Output VGA connected
(II) intel(0): Using fuzzy aspect match for initial modes
(II) intel(0): Output VGA using initial mode 1024x768
(II) intel(0): detected 128 kB GTT.
(II) intel(0): detected 892 kB stolen memory.
(==) intel(0): video overlay key set to 0x83e

None of that tells me why 1600x1200 isn't a choice.

As far as Xrandr being the source of modes, I downloaded some source code and took a look. The gnome-control-center capplet, "display" calls XRRGetScreenInfo which is in libXrandr. libXrandr asks the server for screen info like this:

GetReq (RRGetScreenInfo, req);

I haven't followed it any farther, but I'd guess something in the intel driver would have to tell the server about the resolutions available? I looked thru the intel driver a bit but didn't find anything.

Another thing I haven't mentioned, ages ago, the first time I installed Linux on this machine I had similar issues. I remember having to go into the BIOS and change the video memory from 1meg to 8meg. I've tried booting with both settings with no improvement. I think I have it at 8meg right now.