Radeondrm w/RV370 / X300 SE on 7.0_BETA -- working?

[Havard Eidnes <he%NetBSD.org@localhost>]

Hi,

I've on and off tried to get a NetBSD/amd64 system running
7.0_BETA.  It is currently equipped with an old radeon graphics
card:


NetBSD 7.0_BETA (GENERIC) #1: Wed Sep 17 20:37:35 CEST 2014
        he%is.urc.uninett.no@localhost:/usr/obj/sys/arch/amd64/compile/GENERIC
...
vga0 at pci1 dev 0 function 0: vendor 0x1002 product 0x5b60 (rev. 0x00)
wsdisplay0 at vga0 kbdmux 1: console (80x25, vt100 emulation), using wskbd0
wsmux1: connecting to wsdisplay0
radeondrm0 at vga0: ATI Radeon RV370 X300 SE
radeondrm0: Initialized radeon 1.29.0 20080613
vendor 0x1002 product 0x5b70 (miscellaneous display) at pci1 dev 0 function 1 
not configured
...

However, any attempts at starting the in-tree X server is met
with a kernel core dump, apparently after a kernel trap.

Unfortunately, I don't have a serial console on this host yet,
and it looks like inspection of the saved core dump via "crash"
isn't giving particularly beleivable results:

is# crash -M netbsd.2.core -N netbsd.2
Crash version 7.0_BETA, image version 7.0_BETA.
System panicked: trap
Backtrace from time of crash is available.
crash> tra
_KERNEL_OPT_NARCNET() at 0
_KERNEL_OPT_ACPI_SCANPCI() at _KERNEL_OPT_ACPI_SCANPCI+0x5
vpanic() at vpanic+0x145
snprintf() at snprintf
startlwp() at startlwp
calltrap() at calltrap+0x19
ahci_intr() at ahci_intr+0x90
intr_biglock_wrapper() at intr_biglock_wrapper+0x19
crash> ps
PID    LID S CPU     FLAGS       STRUCT LWP *               NAME WAIT
274  >   1 7   0     40000   fffffe8168d8b9a0               Xorg
859      1 2   0   8020000   fffffe8153f02980              xinit
137      1 2   0   8020000   fffffe8153f02560          ssh-agent
...
crash> t/t 0t274
trace: pid 274 lid 1 at 0xfffffe810b53de98
calltrap() at calltrap+0x19
ahci_intr() at ahci_intr+0x90
intr_biglock_wrapper() at intr_biglock_wrapper+0x19
crash>  

?!?

(I will have a serial console on this host in a while, I'm
currently missing a cable + back-plane connector for the on-board
serial header.)

However, I'd like to ask if this combination is "supposed" to
work, in other words if this is a new and unknown problem.

Best regards,

- Håvard