Re: modesetting vs intel in 10.0

[David Brownlee <abs%absd.org@localhost>]

On Fri, 7 Jul 2023 at 21:39, nia <nia%netbsd.org@localhost> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jul 07, 2023 at 08:18:18PM +0100, David Brownlee wrote:
> > On Fri, 7 Jul 2023 at 19:43, nia <nia%netbsd.org@localhost> wrote:
> > >
> > > After some testing on a Skylake machine, I've concluded
> > > that xf86-video-modesetting is far superior to xf86-video-intel
> > > on that generation of Intel hardware - the most obvious thing
> > > is that modesetting has functional VSync and superior 3D performance
> > > with less tearing.
> > >
> > > Only problem is that we default to intel, modesetting you need
> > > to choose explicitly through xorg.conf.
> > >
> > > I also found similar problems in "radeon", but found that
> > > modesetting would somehow pick a display mode that the monitor
> > > didn't support. Maybe this is actually a drmkms bug - I'm not
> > > sure.
> > >
> > > But maybe modesetting is mature enough (and intel bad enough)
> > > to warrant being the default for Intel GPUs.
> >
> > Could we start with some form of whitelist to pick modesetting over intel?
> >
> > David
>
> Maybe GPUs released after intel became abandonware in 2014 or so...

Would it be worth trying to collect some data on users running NetBSD
on intel display hardware, to see if there are any cases where
intel_drv works and modesetting_drv does not?

As a datapoint, on a Thinkpad T480 runs OK with the default intel_dev.
Renaming away /usr/X11R7/lib/modules/drivers/intel_drv.so and
restarting X runs fine with modesetting_drv, and "grep Mesa
/var/log/Xorg.0.log" gives

(II) modeset(0): glamor X acceleration enabled on Mesa DRI Intel(R)
UHD Graphics 620 (Kabylake GT2)

What would be a good benchmark to stress the system a little?

(I should be able to test on a T430 & T530 & W520 next week :)

David