You are not logged in.

#1 2017-06-17 11:07:08

grimidev
Member
Registered: 2017-06-16
Posts: 7

[SOLVED] Yesterday nvidia was right (1080p), today driver fails

Hello,
Unitl yesterday I used to boot Arch, run

$ startx

and everything was right (screen was in 1080p resolution). Since this morning X starts in 1600x1200.
This is output of xrandr

$ xrandr
xrandr: Failed to get size of gamma for output default
Screen 0: minimum 640 x 480, current 1280 x 1024, maximum 1280 x 1024
default connected 1280x1024+0+0 0mm x 0mm
   1280x1024      0.00* 
   1024x768       0.00  
   800x600        0.00  
   640x480        0.00  
$ dmesg | grep nvidia
[    9.527161] nvidia: disagrees about version of symbol module_layout
[    9.672639] nvidia: disagrees about version of symbol module_layout
[   19.511725] nvidia: disagrees about version of symbol module_layout
[   60.898613] nvidia: disagrees about version of symbol module_layout
[   67.322749] nvidia: disagrees about version of symbol module_layout
[   79.010075] nvidia: disagrees about version of symbol module_layout

Content of /usr/log/Xorg.0.log (I cut off a lot of useless lines because the log was too long)

[   192.110] (==) No screen section available. Using defaults.
[   192.110] (**) |-->Screen "Default Screen Section" (0)
[   192.110] (**) |   |-->Monitor "<default monitor>"
[   192.110] (==) No monitor specified for screen "Default Screen Section".
	Using a default monitor configuration.

[...]

[   192.131] (==) Matched nouveau as autoconfigured driver 0
[   192.131] (==) Matched nv as autoconfigured driver 1
[   192.131] (==) Matched modesetting as autoconfigured driver 2
[   192.131] (==) Matched fbdev as autoconfigured driver 3
[   192.132] (==) Matched vesa as autoconfigured driver 4
[   192.132] (==) Assigned the driver to the xf86ConfigLayout
[   192.132] (II) LoadModule: "nouveau"
[   192.132] (WW) Warning, couldn't open module nouveau
[   192.132] (II) UnloadModule: "nouveau"
[   192.132] (II) Unloading nouveau
[   192.132] (EE) Failed to load module "nouveau" (module does not exist, 0)
[   192.132] (II) LoadModule: "nv"
[   192.132] (WW) Warning, couldn't open module nv
[   192.132] (II) UnloadModule: "nv"
[   192.132] (II) Unloading nv
[   192.132] (EE) Failed to load module "nv" (module does not exist, 0)
[   192.132] (II) LoadModule: "modesetting"
[   192.132] (II) Loading /usr/lib/xorg/modules/drivers/modesetting_drv.so
[   192.150] (II) Module modesetting: vendor="X.Org Foundation"
[   192.150] 	compiled for 1.19.3, module version = 1.19.3
[   192.150] 	Module class: X.Org Video Driver
[   192.150] 	ABI class: X.Org Video Driver, version 23.0
[   192.150] (II) LoadModule: "fbdev"
[   192.151] (WW) Warning, couldn't open module fbdev
[   192.151] (II) UnloadModule: "fbdev"
[   192.151] (II) Unloading fbdev
[   192.151] (EE) Failed to load module "fbdev" (module does not exist, 0)
[   192.151] (II) LoadModule: "vesa"
[   192.151] (II) Loading /usr/lib/xorg/modules/drivers/vesa_drv.so
[   192.159] (II) Module vesa: vendor="X.Org Foundation"
[   192.159] 	compiled for 1.19.0, module version = 2.3.4
[   192.159] 	Module class: X.Org Video Driver
[   192.159] 	ABI class: X.Org Video Driver, version 23.0
[   192.159] (II) modesetting: Driver for Modesetting Kernel Drivers: kms
[   192.159] (II) VESA: driver for VESA chipsets: vesa
[   192.159] (EE) open /dev/dri/card0: No such file or directory
[   192.159] (WW) Falling back to old probe method for modesetting
[   192.159] (EE) open /dev/dri/card0: No such file or directory
[   192.159] (EE) Screen 0 deleted because of no matching config section.
[   192.159] (II) UnloadModule: "modesetting"
[   192.159] (II) Loading sub module "vbe"
[   192.159] (II) LoadModule: "vbe"
[   192.159] (II) Loading /usr/lib/xorg/modules/libvbe.so
[   192.163] (II) Module vbe: vendor="X.Org Foundation"
[   192.163] 	compiled for 1.19.3, module version = 1.1.0
[   192.163] 	ABI class: X.Org Video Driver, version 23.0
[   192.163] (II) Loading sub module "int10"
[   192.163] (II) LoadModule: "int10"
[   192.163] (II) Loading /usr/lib/xorg/modules/libint10.so
[   192.170] (II) Module int10: vendor="X.Org Foundation"
[   192.170] 	compiled for 1.19.3, module version = 1.0.0
[   192.170] 	ABI class: X.Org Video Driver, version 23.0
[   192.170] (II) VESA(0): initializing int10
[   192.171] (II) VESA(0): Bad V_BIOS checksum
[   192.171] (II) VESA(0): Primary V_BIOS segment is: 0xc000
[   192.211] (II) VESA(0): VESA BIOS detected
[   192.211] (II) VESA(0): VESA VBE Version 3.0
[   192.211] (II) VESA(0): VESA VBE Total Mem: 14336 kB
[   192.211] (II) VESA(0): VESA VBE OEM: NVIDIA
[   192.211] (II) VESA(0): VESA VBE OEM Software Rev: 112.4
[   192.211] (II) VESA(0): VESA VBE OEM Vendor: NVIDIA Corporation
[   192.211] (II) VESA(0): VESA VBE OEM Product: GF104 Board - 10410000
[   192.212] (II) VESA(0): VESA VBE OEM Product Rev: Chip Rev   
[   192.297] (II) VESA(0): Creating default Display subsection in Screen section
	"Default Screen Section" for depth/fbbpp 24/32
[   192.297] (==) VESA(0): Depth 24, (--) framebuffer bpp 32
[   192.297] (==) VESA(0): RGB weight 888
[   192.297] (==) VESA(0): Default visual is TrueColor
[   192.297] (==) VESA(0): Using gamma correction (1.0, 1.0, 1.0)
[   192.297] (II) Loading sub module "ddc"
[   192.297] (II) LoadModule: "ddc"
[   192.297] (II) Module "ddc" already built-in
[   192.298] (II) VESA(0): VESA VBE DDC supported
[   192.298] (II) VESA(0): VESA VBE DDC Level 2
[   192.298] (II) VESA(0): VESA VBE DDC transfer in appr. 1 sec.
[   192.347] (II) VESA(0): VESA VBE DDC read successfully
[   192.347] (II) VESA(0): Manufacturer: AOC  Model: 2241  Serial#: 15323
[   192.347] (II) VESA(0): Year: 2010  Week: 49
[   192.347] (II) VESA(0): EDID Version: 1.3
[   192.347] (II) VESA(0): Analog Display Input,  Input Voltage Level: 0.700/0.700 V
[   192.347] (II) VESA(0): Sync:  Separate
[   192.347] (II) VESA(0): Max Image Size [cm]: horiz.: 47  vert.: 26
[   192.347] (II) VESA(0): Gamma: 2.20
[   192.347] (II) VESA(0): DPMS capabilities: Off; RGB/Color Display
[   192.347] (II) VESA(0): First detailed timing is preferred mode
[   192.347] (II) VESA(0): redX: 0.648 redY: 0.339   greenX: 0.282 greenY: 0.603
[   192.347] (II) VESA(0): blueX: 0.143 blueY: 0.070   whiteX: 0.313 whiteY: 0.329
[   192.347] (II) VESA(0): Supported established timings:
[   192.347] (II) VESA(0): 720x400@70Hz
[   192.347] (II) VESA(0): 640x480@60Hz
[   192.347] (II) VESA(0): 640x480@67Hz
[   192.347] (II) VESA(0): 640x480@72Hz
[   192.347] (II) VESA(0): 640x480@75Hz
[   192.347] (II) VESA(0): 800x600@56Hz
[   192.347] (II) VESA(0): 800x600@60Hz
[   192.347] (II) VESA(0): 800x600@72Hz
[   192.347] (II) VESA(0): 800x600@75Hz
[   192.347] (II) VESA(0): 832x624@75Hz
[   192.347] (II) VESA(0): 1024x768@60Hz
[   192.347] (II) VESA(0): 1024x768@70Hz
[   192.347] (II) VESA(0): 1024x768@75Hz
[   192.347] (II) VESA(0): 1280x1024@75Hz
[   192.347] (II) VESA(0): Manufacturer's mask: 0
[   192.347] (II) VESA(0): Supported standard timings:
[   192.347] (II) VESA(0): #0: hsize: 1280  vsize 960  refresh: 60  vid: 16513
[   192.347] (II) VESA(0): #1: hsize: 1280  vsize 1024  refresh: 60  vid: 32897
[   192.347] (II) VESA(0): #2: hsize: 1440  vsize 900  refresh: 60  vid: 149
[   192.347] (II) VESA(0): #3: hsize: 1680  vsize 1050  refresh: 60  vid: 179
[   192.347] (II) VESA(0): #4: hsize: 1920  vsize 1080  refresh: 60  vid: 49361
[   192.347] (II) VESA(0): #5: hsize: 1024  vsize 768  refresh: 72  vid: 19553
[   192.347] (II) VESA(0): #6: hsize: 1280  vsize 1024  refresh: 72  vid: 35969
[   192.347] (II) VESA(0): #7: hsize: 1152  vsize 864  refresh: 75  vid: 20337

[...]

[   192.380] 
[   192.380] (II) VESA(0): Total Memory: 224 64KB banks (14336kB)
[   192.380] (II) VESA(0): <default monitor>: Using hsync range of 30.00-83.00 kHz
[   192.380] (II) VESA(0): <default monitor>: Using vrefresh range of 55.00-75.00 Hz
[   192.380] (II) VESA(0): <default monitor>: Using maximum pixel clock of 175.00 MHz
[   192.380] (WW) VESA(0): Unable to estimate virtual size
[   192.380] (II) VESA(0): Not using built-in mode "1600x1200" (no mode of this name)
[   192.383] (II) VESA(0): Not using built-in mode "640x400" (no mode of this name)
[   192.383] (II) VESA(0): Not using built-in mode "320x400" (no mode of this name)
[   192.383] (II) VESA(0): Not using built-in mode "320x240" (no mode of this name)
[   192.383] (II) VESA(0): Not using built-in mode "320x200" (no mode of this name)
[   192.383] (--) VESA(0): Virtual size is 1280x1024 (pitch 1280)
[   192.383] (**) VESA(0): *Built-in mode "1280x1024"
[   192.383] (**) VESA(0): *Built-in mode "1024x768"
[   192.383] (**) VESA(0): *Built-in mode "800x600"
[   192.383] (**) VESA(0): *Built-in mode "640x480"
[   192.383] (**) VESA(0): Display dimensions: (470, 260) mm
[   192.383] (**) VESA(0): DPI set to (69, 100)
[   192.383] (**) VESA(0): Using "Shadow Framebuffer"
[   192.383] (II) Loading sub module "shadow"
[   192.383] (II) LoadModule: "shadow"
[   192.383] (II) Loading /usr/lib/xorg/modules/libshadow.so
[   192.392] (II) Module shadow: vendor="X.Org Foundation"
[   192.392] 	compiled for 1.19.3, module version = 1.1.0
[   192.392] 	ABI class: X.Org ANSI C Emulation, version 0.4
[   192.392] (II) Loading sub module "fb"
[   192.392] (II) LoadModule: "fb"
[   192.392] (II) Loading /usr/lib/xorg/modules/libfb.so
[   192.392] (II) Module fb: vendor="X.Org Foundation"
[   192.392] 	compiled for 1.19.3, module version = 1.0.0
[   192.392] 	ABI class: X.Org ANSI C Emulation, version 0.4
[   192.392] (==) Depth 24 pixmap format is 32 bpp
[   192.393] (II) Loading sub module "int10"
[   192.393] (II) LoadModule: "int10"
[   192.393] (II) Loading /usr/lib/xorg/modules/libint10.so
[   192.393] (II) Module int10: vendor="X.Org Foundation"
[   192.393] 	compiled for 1.19.3, module version = 1.0.0
[   192.393] 	ABI class: X.Org Video Driver, version 23.0
[   192.393] (II) VESA(0): initializing int10
[   192.393] (II) VESA(0): Bad V_BIOS checksum
[   192.393] (II) VESA(0): Primary V_BIOS segment is: 0xc000
[   192.423] (II) VESA(0): VESA BIOS detected
[   192.423] (II) VESA(0): VESA VBE Version 3.0
[   192.423] (II) VESA(0): VESA VBE Total Mem: 14336 kB
[   192.423] (II) VESA(0): VESA VBE OEM: NVIDIA
[   192.423] (II) VESA(0): VESA VBE OEM Software Rev: 112.4
[   192.423] (II) VESA(0): VESA VBE OEM Vendor: NVIDIA Corporation
[   192.423] (II) VESA(0): VESA VBE OEM Product: GF104 Board - 10410000
[   192.423] (II) VESA(0): VESA VBE OEM Product Rev: Chip Rev   
[   192.424] (II) VESA(0): virtual address = 0x7f7f15a24000,
	physical address = 0xed000000, size = 14680064
[   192.460] (II) VESA(0): Setting up VESA Mode 0x11B (1280x1024)
[   192.577] (==) VESA(0): Default visual is TrueColor
[   192.589] (==) VESA(0): Backing store enabled
[   192.589] (==) VESA(0): DPMS enabled
[   192.589] (==) RandR enabled
[   192.594] (II) AIGLX: Screen 0 is not DRI2 capable
[   192.594] (EE) AIGLX: reverting to software rendering
[   193.361] (II) IGLX: enabled GLX_MESA_copy_sub_buffer


[...]

These informations make me think that the monitor/screen is not well recognized by arch, probably because something in nvidia driver fails.

As I remember, yesterday i did nothing that could've broken nvidia driver, at most I did a

$ sudo pacman -Syu 

I don't thing the following could be the key of problem but as I installed arch, I blacklisted linux package in Pacman to prevent kernel upgrade.

Last edited by grimidev (2017-06-20 13:31:42)

Offline

#2 2017-06-17 11:53:35

loqs
Member
Registered: 2014-03-06
Posts: 17,372

Re: [SOLVED] Yesterday nvidia was right (1080p), today driver fails

grimidev wrote:
$ dmesg | grep nvidia
[    9.527161] nvidia: disagrees about version of symbol module_layout
[    9.672639] nvidia: disagrees about version of symbol module_layout
[   19.511725] nvidia: disagrees about version of symbol module_layout
[   60.898613] nvidia: disagrees about version of symbol module_layout
[   67.322749] nvidia: disagrees about version of symbol module_layout
[   79.010075] nvidia: disagrees about version of symbol module_layout

at most I did a

$ sudo pacman -Syu 

I don't thing the following could be the key of problem but as I installed arch, I blacklisted linux package in Pacman to prevent kernel upgrade.

Check pacman.log I suspect you upgraded the nvidia package to a version built for a newer kernel but as you stated you prevented the kernel from being updated as well.
Why do you want to prevent kernel updates?

Offline

#3 2017-06-17 12:57:16

grimidev
Member
Registered: 2017-06-16
Posts: 7

Re: [SOLVED] Yesterday nvidia was right (1080p), today driver fails

loqs wrote:
grimidev wrote:
$ dmesg | grep nvidia
[    9.527161] nvidia: disagrees about version of symbol module_layout
[    9.672639] nvidia: disagrees about version of symbol module_layout
[   19.511725] nvidia: disagrees about version of symbol module_layout
[   60.898613] nvidia: disagrees about version of symbol module_layout
[   67.322749] nvidia: disagrees about version of symbol module_layout
[   79.010075] nvidia: disagrees about version of symbol module_layout

at most I did a

$ sudo pacman -Syu 

I don't thing the following could be the key of problem but as I installed arch, I blacklisted linux package in Pacman to prevent kernel upgrade.

Check pacman.log I suspect you upgraded the nvidia package to a version built for a newer kernel but as you stated you prevented the kernel from being updated as well.
Why do you want to prevent kernel updates?

I think you're right..

$ grep -e "nvidia" pacman.log
[...]
[2017-06-16 10:28] [ALPM] upgraded nvidia (381.22-2 -> 381.22-3)
[2017-06-16 10:28] [ALPM-SCRIPTLET] In order to use nvidia module, reboot the system.
[...]

With regard to kernel updates... A while ago I was on Linux Mint, on Mint the package updater numbers the updates from 1 (tested, official and safe) to 5 (potentially dangerous, could break the system). The kernel updates are marked with number 5. Therefore I started avoid kernel updates, if not strictly needed (e.g. big security updates..). This is the reason why I decided to disable kernel updates also on arch.


So the question is: should I reactivate kernel updates?

Offline

#4 2017-06-17 13:12:36

loqs
Member
Registered: 2014-03-06
Posts: 17,372

Re: [SOLVED] Yesterday nvidia was right (1080p), today driver fails

Its your choice either enable kernel updates or downgrade then put on ignore all packages providing external kernel modules such as nvidia.
New releases of the kernel package contains bug fixes you can read the change list for the releases upstream at kernel.org.
As long as the upgrade is not to a new series ie from 4.11.x to 4.12.x then I would not rate the risk as particularly higher than any other package.
You can also install a second kernel such as linux-lts in case of issues with a single kernel.  You can also use the live media chroot in and downgrade the kernel if an issue arises.

Offline

#5 2017-06-17 14:32:01

grimidev
Member
Registered: 2017-06-16
Posts: 7

Re: [SOLVED] Yesterday nvidia was right (1080p), today driver fails

loqs wrote:

Its your choice either enable kernel updates or downgrade then put on ignore all packages providing external kernel modules such as nvidia.
New releases of the kernel package contains bug fixes you can read the change list for the releases upstream at kernel.org.
As long as the upgrade is not to a new series ie from 4.11.x to 4.12.x then I would not rate the risk as particularly higher than any other package.
You can also install a second kernel such as linux-lts in case of issues with a single kernel.  You can also use the live media chroot in and downgrade the kernel if an issue arises.

Now I'm going to upgrade the linux kernel. For the future I have to choose between:

1) Don't update the kernel and keep an eye on updates of packages that provide external kernel modules (How to recognize them?)

2) Keep all packages active (also the linux kernel one), update everything with sudo pacman -Syu and if any problem occurs then downgrade the kernel to the previous version.

3) Switch to linux-lts and uninstall linux (essentially do something like this-> https://goo.gl/WQ6RyP)

Offline

#6 2017-06-17 17:45:28

loqs
Member
Registered: 2014-03-06
Posts: 17,372

Re: [SOLVED] Yesterday nvidia was right (1080p), today driver fails

grimidev wrote:

1) Don't update the kernel and keep an eye on updates of packages that provide external kernel modules (How to recognize them?)

This will find all packages that use the extramodules directory for the current running kernel tracked by pacman so the output will be the kernel package plus packages supplying external modules.

$ pacman -Qo `readlink -f /usr/lib/modules/\`uname -r\`/extramodules`
grimidev wrote:

3) Switch to linux-lts and uninstall linux (essentially do something like this-> https://goo.gl/WQ6RyP)

You can have linux and linux-lts installed in parallel you would also need to add the appropriate external modules for linux-lts such as nvidia-lts.

Offline

#7 2017-06-18 08:47:13

grimidev
Member
Registered: 2017-06-16
Posts: 7

Re: [SOLVED] Yesterday nvidia was right (1080p), today driver fails

loqs wrote:
grimidev wrote:

1) Don't update the kernel and keep an eye on updates of packages that provide external kernel modules (How to recognize them?)

This will find all packages that use the extramodules directory for the current running kernel tracked by pacman so the output will be the kernel package plus packages supplying external modules.

$ pacman -Qo `readlink -f /usr/lib/modules/\`uname -r\`/extramodules`
grimidev wrote:

3) Switch to linux-lts and uninstall linux (essentially do something like this-> https://goo.gl/WQ6RyP)

You can have linux and linux-lts installed in parallel you would also need to add the appropriate external modules for linux-lts such as nvidia-lts.

This is exactly what I need, thank you!!

Offline

#8 2017-06-18 11:55:10

loqs
Member
Registered: 2014-03-06
Posts: 17,372

Re: [SOLVED] Yesterday nvidia was right (1080p), today driver fails

If you are satisfied a solution has been found,  please mark your thread as solved by editing the first post and prepending the tag [SOLVED] to the title in the "Subject" field.

Offline

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB