Login
Username:

Password:

Remember me



Lost Password?

Register now!
Main Menu
Who's Online
1 user(s) are online (1 user(s) are browsing Forum)

Members: 0
Guests: 1

more...

Browsing this Thread:   1 Anonymous Users



« 1 ... 9 10 11 (12)


Re: Return to Castle Wolfenstein

Joined:
2004/3/29 9:54
From Scotland "The Cold"
Group:
Member
Posts: 2024
Offline
@ Magorium

Similar happens on Raspi when I try to open screens lower than the physical dimensions of the actual display. As Bszili has explained - it is the hardware/driver at fault. The game just asks for a certain size screen - it doesn't know about the physical limitations of the actual hardware, nor can it fill in those corrupt areas (where do you poke when the hardware just gives the buffer you asked for (1) - the "space" that is covered by the bitmaps stride is handled by itself generally.

(1) - It _might_ be possible for the driver to determine/do this, depending on how the hardware exposes the buffer.

Posted on: 2013/3/12 9:20
_________________
Click to see original Image in a new window
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer


Re: Return to Castle Wolfenstein

Joined:
2011/9/25 1:23
From Hungary
Group:
Member
Posts: 1506
Offline
It would be a little hard to conceal the truth, after writing it down every single time I get a bogus bugreport because the limitations of the VESA driver. Well, I guess everyone has their faults, mine is avoiding questions, answered by me and others a hundred times before.

Posted on: 2013/3/12 9:24
_________________
My AROS&MorphOS ports
Arguments that explain everything... explain nothing.
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer


Re: Return to Castle Wolfenstein

Joined:
2011/6/30 19:50
Group:
Member
Posts: 4095
Offline
@kalamatee/BSzili:
Quote:
As Bszili has explained - it is the hardware/driver at fault. The game just asks for a certain size screen - it doesn't know about the physical limitations of the actual hardware,

Exactly my point

So for instance let say i have a wierd videocard that does not support 1024x768 but all other 'normal' other resolutions. But i keep insisting. Who's fault it is then ?

Wasn't that what bestmodeid was invented for ? How does our screenmode requester knows about available (video) resolutions ?

Maybe i'm the one not understanding this, but i open up a screen what _can_ be supported in the first place. If it doesn't fit my requirements i scale down in case the requested videomode is smaller and if it's bigger i adjust my backgroundwindow and blit so that it get's centered on the screen.

No wierd arteffects whatsoever since yourself are responsible for it.

What's wrong with that ? hence my remarks....

So as for the truth, imo it is the code that expects wierd videomodes to be present and acts on it even though it's possible to know it's wrong.

Is it a limitation of the driver ?.

Yes ofcourse it is.

But this also is true for a fully (AROS) supported videocard with thousands of resolutions. If code keeps insisting on opening a 160x30 resolution screen that the card does not support then you are screwed when not taking the consequences of it into account.

?

Posted on: 2013/3/12 10:07
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer


Re: Return to Castle Wolfenstein

Joined:
2011/9/25 1:23
From Hungary
Group:
Member
Posts: 1506
Offline
It's John Carmack's fault, for using a fixed list of resolutions, but custom video modes also supported since id Tech 3. You can use whatever resolution you want. I'm also not responsible to how the SDL internals work.

Posted on: 2013/3/12 10:53
_________________
My AROS&MorphOS ports
Arguments that explain everything... explain nothing.
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer


Re: Return to Castle Wolfenstein

Joined:
2011/6/30 19:50
Group:
Member
Posts: 4095
Offline
@BSzili:
I'm very sorry for the nitpicking, and thank you for your answer.

There's nothing wrong with telling me to piss off because it's not your doing but other things that complicate things.. (and most probably isn't even worth the hassle)

Dunno if i already told you, but thank you very much for spending your private time on another splendid port and all the attention that it brings Aros

Posted on: 2013/3/12 11:14
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer


Re: Return to Castle Wolfenstein

Joined:
2004/3/29 9:54
From Scotland "The Cold"
Group:
Member
Posts: 2024
Offline
Quote:

magorium wrote:


So as for the truth, imo it is the code that expects wierd videomodes to be present and acts on it even though it's possible to know it's wrong.

Is it a limitation of the driver ?.

Yes ofcourse it is.

But this also is true for a fully (AROS) supported videocard with thousands of resolutions. If code keeps insisting on opening a 160x30 resolution screen that the card does not support then you are screwed when not taking the consequences of it into account.

?


Unfortunately - you've got it backwards.

If the videocard DRIVER said it only supported 1600x1200, and you opened a 640x480 screen - you would (partly) get what you expect - a display in 640x680 area of the 1600x1200 display with the surrounding area black.

if your DRIVER said, on the other hand, that it supports 640x480 but the display doesn't, then it (or the hardware) compensates - and that's where the corruption then occurs.

Posted on: 2013/3/12 17:29
_________________
Click to see original Image in a new window
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer


Re: Return to Castle Wolfenstein

Joined:
2011/6/30 19:50
Group:
Member
Posts: 4095
Offline
@Kalamatee:
Quote:
Unfortunately - you've got it backwards.

Then i stand corrected ofcourse

Quote:
if your DRIVER said, on the other hand, that it supports 640x480 but the display doesn't, then it (or the hardware) compensates - and that's where the corruption then occurs.

I can see this happen, just not why. In that case isn't it the driver who is at wrong ? (i am unsure of the details in this case).

Reason for me is that using plain api-calls i am unable to get myself in that situation. Ofcourse i realize, you probably presented conditions that i am unable to re-create (without making own driver).

Posted on: 2013/3/13 9:43
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer


Re: Return to Castle Wolfenstein

Joined:
2004/3/29 9:54
From Scotland "The Cold"
Group:
Member
Posts: 2024
Offline
Quote:

magorium wrote:
@Kalamatee:
Quote:
Unfortunately - you've got it backwards.

Then i stand corrected ofcourse

Quote:
if your DRIVER said, on the other hand, that it supports 640x480 but the display doesn't, then it (or the hardware) compensates - and that's where the corruption then occurs.

I can see this happen, just not why. In that case isn't it the driver who is at wrong ? (i am unsure of the details in this case).


I only understand what is happening because I added a 640x480 mode to the raspi driver with the same nasty results. Ive disabled that code for the time being, so that the driver only uses the resolution the videocore says is currently set (and just now Im not sure how to query it for supported modes). That means AROS handles the disparity between the sizes now so you don't get the corruption (though it is still jammed up in the top left corner)

Quote:

Reason for me is that using plain api-calls i am unable to get myself in that situation. Ofcourse i realize, you probably presented conditions that i am unable to re-create (without making own driver).


It depends if it is able to or not. It might not be possible to tell the hardware to fill in the blanks - and you cant guarantee that the resolutions that it says are available, actually are.

Posted on: 2013/3/13 11:19
_________________
Click to see original Image in a new window
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer


Re: Return to Castle Wolfenstein

Joined:
2011/6/30 19:50
Group:
Member
Posts: 4095
Offline
Quote:
I only understand what is happening because I added a 640x480 mode to the raspi driver with the same nasty results.

Isn't that not because there is a discrepancy between supporting the mode (which vesa should) and actualy outputting it ?


Quote:
It depends if it is able to or not. It might not be possible to tell the hardware to fill in the blanks - and you cant guarantee that the resolutions that it says are available, actually are.

Ok, sorry. In my inital replies i had the impression from your statements that it was certain.

Isn't it so that A) gfx card supports different resolutions, B) vesa has it's own set of supported resolution and c) the monitor has it's set of supported resolutions ?

Shouldn't the (vesa) driver report back and/or stick with those that match between monitor and card ?

If i look at how it works for me in vesa (which puzzles me a little because resolution not supported officially) then my monitors returns back it's (highest) mode and the driver sticks to that. If i open up a 320x200 screen then ofcourse vesa/card supports this, yet vesa driver returns my highest monitor resolution for the screenmode. Which in this case is out of the ordinairy for me as it isn't a vesa mode. (Therefore it opens a 1920x1080 screen).

So to me it looks that with vesa, the monitor get's probed for it's resolution and the driver tries matching the highest supported resolution from monitor with the gfx-card.

That would explain why the same machine using vesa and native adjust the supported resolution(s) to match the (different) monitors.

But like i said, i do not know this for a fact.

Posted on: 2013/3/13 14:26
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer


Re: Return to Castle Wolfenstein

Joined:
2010/5/18 11:49
From Italy
Group:
Member
Posts: 797
Offline
I have a intel 900 series very slow, I just wanted to try

hi all


Posted on: 2014/1/21 12:42
_________________
Aros AbiV0 Dell Latitude Laptop C610

http://www.planet-eu.it/aros
https://soundcloud.com/sabbate
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer



« 1 ... 9 10 11 (12)



You can view topic.
You cannot start a new topic.
You cannot reply to posts.
You cannot edit your posts.
You cannot delete your posts.
You cannot add new polls.
You cannot vote in polls.
You cannot attach files to posts.
You cannot post without approval.

[Advanced Search]


Search
Top Posters
1 paolone
paolone
4347
2 magorium
magorium
4095
3 phoenixkonsole
phoenixkonsole
3891
4 nikolaos
nikolaos
3677
5 deadwood
deadwood
2923
6 ncafferkey
ncafferkey
2634
7 mazze
mazze
2214
8 clusteruk
clusteruk
2104
9 Kalamatee
Kalamatee
2024
10 damocles
damocles
1789
© 2004-2017 AROS Exec