Mesa 9.2 Release Candidate 1 Now Surfaces

[Ericg]

I'm getting horrible results with 9.2.0rc1-1 in arch.
Perhaps someone could be of assistance.

After mesa 9.2.0rc1 made its way into [testing], I gave it a go by updating all needed packages for both x64 and x86 (via multilib, for wine).
First attempt worked like a charm - played a video for a few seconds in mpv using UVD (hwdec=vdpau, vo=vdpau) without any problem.
Since then, everything went downhill - mpv can't play anymore, it will just lock (and take the whole system with it) once it's done with the initialization phase (filter selection etc.).
Moreover, wine will also cause the same behavior when the video card is put under a bit of stress (gaming) - lock within a minute or so of launch.
Is there any way of "resetting" mesa, to rule out any 9.1.x-9.2 configuration errors?
On a side note, 9.1.6 worked just fine (no UVD, obviously) with Wine.
Thanks, Adam.

I have a Mobility Radeon 4570HD.

[adamdagan@admdgn ~]$ glxinfo | grep ^OpenGL | egrep 'version|renderer'
OpenGL renderer string: Gallium 0.4 on AMD RV710
OpenGL core profile version string: 3.1 (Core Profile) Mesa 9.2.0-rc1
OpenGL core profile shading language version string: 1.40
OpenGL version string: 3.0 Mesa 9.2.0-rc1
OpenGL shading language version string: 1.30

Did you build the packages yourself or install them from like Testing?

If you installed from testing then you can just downgrade the appropriate packages. The arch wiki has an entire page dedicated to the process, warnings, and how-tos of downgrading packages: https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php...ading_Packages

Keep in mind...

Consider the dependencies of each program. The required libraries often change with each version, and the functionality of associated files may be completely different from previous ones. The solution will require changing these to earlier versions as well.

You might be better off asking on the Arch Forums specifically, I run Fedora now otherwise i'd be willing to walk ya through it, but the actual Forums might be better off at giving you a dependency list for EVERYTHING that needs to be downgraded beyond just Mesa.


Now, all that assumes you installed actual arch packages... if you built and installed by hand then things get complicated, and again...ask the Arch forums.

[pingufunkybeat]

Hmm? Even if it's only intel for now, that's still OpenGL 3.3, and still warrants a Mesa 11.

Why 11 when the current version is 9.x?

When the jump from GL 3.1 to GL 3.3 happens, the major version number goes up, as always.

[halfmanhalfamazing]

Hmm? Even if it's only intel for now, that's still OpenGL 3.3, and still warrants a Mesa 11.

The current version is 9.x

Chances are, both OpenGL 3.2 and 3.3 will be finalized in the same Mesa version, which would make it 10.

I highly doubt the Mesa folks are going to release Mesa 10 for OpenGL 3.2 AND Mesa 11 for OpenGL 3.3 next november and try supporting two concurrent streams, that just wouldn't make sense. The gl3.txt page makes it seem like the work for OpenGL 3.3 is pretty much done, so I don't see any reason why 3.2 and 3.3 will land at different times.

It will be nice once they finalize the entire OpenGL 3.x stack.

[adam777]

Did you build the packages yourself or install them from like Testing?

If you installed from testing then you can just downgrade the appropriate packages. The arch wiki has an entire page dedicated to the process, warnings, and how-tos of downgrading packages: https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php...ading_Packages

Keep in mind...



You might be better off asking on the Arch Forums specifically, I run Fedora now otherwise i'd be willing to walk ya through it, but the actual Forums might be better off at giving you a dependency list for EVERYTHING that needs to be downgraded beyond just Mesa.


Now, all that assumes you installed actual arch packages... if you built and installed by hand then things get complicated, and again...ask the Arch forums.

Thanks, Ericg.
Downgrading and so isn't a problem, I just thought there might be something more general to check.

[mattst88]

Why 11 when the current version is 9.x?

When the jump from GL 3.1 to GL 3.3 happens, the major version number goes up, as always.

We've joked that since we'd be jumping two GL versions, we'd jump two Mesa versions as well. Also, then we could say "This Mesa goes to 11"

[Alejandro Nova]

BTW, where are Fedora packages of this? Mesa 9.2.0 rc1 solves an important issue with EGL + r600g (vsync is broken), so if I can get those updated packages, I'll finally be able to use KDE 4.11 with EGL and v-sync. So Mesa 9.2.0 is really important for us.

[Ericg]

BTW, where are Fedora packages of this? Mesa 9.2.0 rc1 solves an important issue with EGL + r600g (vsync is broken), so if I can get those updated packages, I'll finally be able to use KDE 4.11 with EGL and v-sync. So Mesa 9.2.0 is really important for us.

sudo yum info mesa-dri-drivers

Its already mesa 9.2 (July 23rd snapshot)

[smitty3268]

Also, then we could say "This Mesa goes to 11"

But then we'd have no incentive to ever develop GL 4.0 support.

[GreatEmerald]

We've joked that since we'd be jumping two GL versions, we'd jump two Mesa versions as well. Also, then we could say "This Mesa goes to 11"

That's exactly what I was referring to

[Alejandro Nova]

sudo yum info mesa-dri-drivers

Its already mesa 9.2 (July 23rd snapshot)

Not enough (the bug I'm referring to was fixed on August 3th, and we are waiting for Mesa 9.2 rc1)