Current situation for 945GM and below users -- downgrade only option?

Ronin-Sage · 2009-02-15 01:57:11

I'm running ArchLinux on an Acer 5610-4610(Intel 945GM, 950GMA), and I've almost(...*almost*) gotten used to seeing mesa, xorg-server, and such being on the pacman ignore notification when I update(I can't use the latest xf86-video-intel and therefore the latest dependencies an utterly handicapping reduction in performance), and this recent fiasco I've had with the transition to hotplugging makes matters even worse.

Staying with downgraded xorg-server means ignoring evdev and such upgrades, I would imagine, so my question is this: is my only option until kernel-2.6.29 is released(a month 1/2 from now?) to keep this growing number of packages downgraded to retain usability on ArchLinux?

Bogart · 2009-02-15 10:39:16

Ronin-Sage wrote:

I'm running ArchLinux on an Acer 5610-4610(Intel 945GM, 950GMA), and I've almost(...*almost*) gotten used to seeing mesa, xorg-server, and such being on the pacman ignore notification when I update(I can't use the latest xf86-video-intel and therefore the latest dependencies an utterly handicapping reduction in performance), and this recent fiasco I've had with the transition to hotplugging makes matters even worse.
Staying with downgraded xorg-server means ignoring evdev and such upgrades, I would imagine, so my question is this: is my only option until kernel-2.6.29 is released(a month 1/2 from now?) to keep this growing number of packages downgraded to retain usability on ArchLinux?

Could you elaborate on your problems? Why you can't use the latest Intel drivers? Do they have a bug that prevents you from using them? Is the bug an upstream one or Arch specific? Arch is not even using the latest, but the 2.4.x series.

And you say that staying with the old packages is utterly handicapping performance for you? You mean that if you do upgrade your packages you get much better performance but also some showstopper bug?

I have two desktops with an Intel IGP and don't have any problems. One has the latest G45 chipset and the other an old 845G one. Also a laptop with GM965 has no problems, but that one's running Ubuntu, not Arch.

Ronin-Sage · 2009-02-15 22:03:13

Basically, I can only stick with:

xorg-server-1.4.2-2
mesa-7.0.3-3
intel-dri-7.0.3-1
libgl-7.0.3-2
xf86-video-intel-2.3.2-1

Upgrading these packages results in drastically reduced performance in 3D apps(as well as a noticeable lag in general desktop use, which may or may not be related). With that said, I have the aforementioned packages on my ignore-list, to retain usability. However, the introduction of hotpluging in libudev(?) after a recent upgrade makes it necessary to upgrade xorg-server to configure it correctly. Upgrading xorg-server seems to break the other video packages, which is resolved by an upgrade and obviously I arrive where I started.

I'm wondering if there's any way to be able to upgrade before kernel-2.6.29 is released(which is supposed to resolve the GEM issues, I believe)?

Thanks and I apologize for the rather noobish use of the terminology.

buttons · 2009-02-15 22:09:57

The short answer is yes.

Some people have had success with far more bleeding edge packages, however (at least they were at the end of december):
http://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=61650

Ronin-Sage · 2009-02-15 22:30:06

But would such a thing work for 950GMA and below users? The users reporting performance resolutions/boosts seem to be '965+ users.

Allan · 2009-02-15 22:36:52

Only way to find out is to try it and see...

Ronin-Sage · 2009-02-15 23:27:14

Heh, I guess so. Thanks-all, I'll try it out when I boot back into Arch soon.

Bogart · 2009-02-16 10:59:13

Are you using EXA or XAA? I have an old Pentium 4 with i845 and performance is fine if I use XAA, but very sluggish with EXA. So maybe that's the problem you're having. Easy to solve, though, by adding:

Option "AccelMethod" "XAA"

to the Device section in your /Etc/X11/xorg.conf

Ronin-Sage · 2009-02-16 12:16:45

(gave up on using those PKGBUILDs for now--kept getting an compile error for xorg-server)

Thanks--switching to XAA does help things, but 3D apps are still slow. The up-side is that I'm not seeing the usual colored-bar/mess in my first-loaded 3D app like I used to, but I'm getting around 365fps in glxgears(when I should be getting several times more).

biagio · 2009-02-16 13:49:08

XAA seems better on my laptop with 950GMA but prevents the use of the webcam. But using EXA or UXA the webcam works fine.

archlinuxsagi · 2009-02-16 14:13:15

mmm.. me wondering why a lot of archers having issues with 945GM. I am using Dell 640m here. Compiz is good since kernel 2.6.28.
The only trick I have done is go without xorg.conf

buttons · 2009-02-16 14:55:43

archlinuxsagi wrote:

mmm.. me wondering why a lot of archers having issues with 945GM. I am using Dell 640m here. Compiz is good since kernel 2.6.28.
The only trick I have done is go without xorg.conf

Chances are pretty good you simply didn't know your chipset should be running at 3x the speed. I didn't for quite a while.

_oggy · 2009-02-16 18:20:36

Um, from what I understand, 2.6.28 already has the support for GEM, but the current stable xorg intel driver and libdrm? Or are there issues that I don't know about?

Just an interested 945GM user

Ronin-Sage · 2009-02-16 20:25:11

Did you mean "[...] but the current stable[...]" -do not-?

karabaja4 · 2009-02-16 22:57:02

This whole xorg/intel mess made me seriously consider switching back to windows xp so I don't have to use xorg and all it's crap. At the moment my computer is not very usable and newest xorg-server or xf86-video-intel are not even in testing.

_oggy · 2009-02-17 11:04:20

Ronin-Sage wrote:

Did you mean "[...] but the current stable[...]" -do not-?

Yes, exactly.

For some reason I'm always a words short these

Ronin-Sage · 2009-02-17 22:14:48

karabaja4 wrote:

This whole xorg/intel mess made me seriously consider switching back to windows xp so I don't have to use xorg and all it's crap. At the moment my computer is not very usable and newest xorg-server or xf86-video-intel are not even in testing.

That bad, eh? Well, I'm going to try a few reckless/adventurous things to maybe get all the bleeding-edge stuff related to graphics for my system...I'll let y'all know how that goes.

1LordAnubis · 2009-02-17 22:29:09

my current intel 945 gm is quite usable... works great with kde 4.2 desktop effects....
the only thing I have a problem with is if I try to run a fps game like tremulous, where my fps seems to be reduced to half what it used to be

Arch Linux

#1 2009-02-15 01:57:11

Current situation for 945GM and below users -- downgrade only option?

#2 2009-02-15 10:39:16

Re: Current situation for 945GM and below users -- downgrade only option?

#3 2009-02-15 22:03:13

Re: Current situation for 945GM and below users -- downgrade only option?

#4 2009-02-15 22:09:57

Re: Current situation for 945GM and below users -- downgrade only option?

#5 2009-02-15 22:30:06

Re: Current situation for 945GM and below users -- downgrade only option?

#6 2009-02-15 22:36:52

Re: Current situation for 945GM and below users -- downgrade only option?

#7 2009-02-15 23:27:14

Re: Current situation for 945GM and below users -- downgrade only option?

#8 2009-02-16 10:59:13

Re: Current situation for 945GM and below users -- downgrade only option?

#9 2009-02-16 12:16:45

Re: Current situation for 945GM and below users -- downgrade only option?

#10 2009-02-16 13:49:08

Re: Current situation for 945GM and below users -- downgrade only option?

#11 2009-02-16 14:13:15

Re: Current situation for 945GM and below users -- downgrade only option?

#12 2009-02-16 14:55:43

Re: Current situation for 945GM and below users -- downgrade only option?

#13 2009-02-16 18:20:36

Re: Current situation for 945GM and below users -- downgrade only option?

#14 2009-02-16 20:25:11

Re: Current situation for 945GM and below users -- downgrade only option?

#15 2009-02-16 22:57:02

Re: Current situation for 945GM and below users -- downgrade only option?

#16 2009-02-17 11:04:20

Re: Current situation for 945GM and below users -- downgrade only option?

#17 2009-02-17 22:14:48

Re: Current situation for 945GM and below users -- downgrade only option?

#18 2009-02-17 22:29:09

Re: Current situation for 945GM and below users -- downgrade only option?

Board footer