[haiku-development] Re: Boot Screen Not Displayed with Various Video Chips
- From: "Axel Dörfler" <axeld@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: haiku-development@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 02 Nov 2008 16:22:17 +0100 CET
Hi Gerald,
Gerald Zajac <zajacg@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I installed hard disk image r28411, and did some testing. For the S3
> Trio, S3 Virge, and the ATI Rage128 and Mach64 chips the boot
> resoultion
> is now 1024x768x16; however, for the ATI chips this is true only if
> the
> screen resolution was not set to a higher resolution via the Screen
> Preferences while Haiku was running before the reboot. Whereas, for
> the
> S3 chips having the screen resolution set to 1280x1024 via Screen
> Preferences did not affect the boot screen resolution used for the
> these
> chips which was 1024x768x16.
Which is strange, as the "vesa" mode file is always used in the boot
loader when it's present.
> Based on the results with the ATI chips, the boot screen resolution
> should not be increased because the screen resolution was previously
> set higher via the Screen Preferences. If there is a driver other
> than
> the VESA driver for a chip which allows the chip to be run at a
> higher
> resolution, it does not mean that the VESA modes used by the boot
> loader
> will also work at the higher resolution.
Usually it shouldn't be a problem, as VESA usually is capable of
displaying the modes it advertizes ;-)
I'm not sure how to best work around this; since the VESA driver can
now switch the resolution itself, the vesa mode file has lost most of
its relevance. I guess we should just remove writing the file from the
Screen preferences, and let the user try and see if he's not lucky with
the automatically selected resolution. For systems with proper EDID
information everything stays the same, at least, although it might be
problematic for some laptop panels (sometimes they just don't use EDID,
and then the mechanism of taking over the resolution is nice).
When a user copies his system to another machine (or just switches
monitors), it's always a good idea to not have any fixed configured
values, though.
> There was one other chip I tested which was a SIS 6326 where I had to
> use the boot menu to select a resolution of 800x600 before it would
> display the boot screen. 1024x768 would not do it. This chip might
> be
> as isolated example for which it is not worth making changes.
We could easily fix this by using the VESA identifier of this chip, and
hardcode a lower resolution for this one; I would guess it won't stay
the only chipset there, either.
Bye,
Axel.
Other related posts:
