Update x11-server to 1.20.7 and libepoxy to 1.5.4 in order as per upstream recommendation for the mesa 20.x series: https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/mesa-maintainers/2020-January/000150.html Gen12+ (Tigerlake) hardware is only supported by iris. Dependencies on the X Server ---------------------------- We recommend upgrading to xserver 1.20.7 and libepoxy 1.5.4 before shipping iris. The modesetting driver in 1.20.7 will consult Mesa to choose the DRI driver, instead of hardcoding i965. So whatever decision you make for Mesa will apply to the whole system. With older X servers, you may have a case where apps use iris for GL, but modesetting+glamor uses i965. Although this can work, we don't recommend shipping such a configuration. Why Switch? ----------- The new iris driver is significantly more efficient than i965. Recent benchmarking [1] shows that it's roughly 5-10% faster at many actual applications. In simple CPU overhead tests, iris can issue 5-20x as many draw calls per second as i965. Our hope is that this lower overhead will translate to better laptop battery life and higher performance. SRPMS: x11-server-1.20.7-1.mga7.src.rpm libepoxy-1.5.4-1.mga7.src.rpm i586: x11-server-1.20.7-1.mga7.i586.rpm x11-server-common-1.20.7-1.mga7.i586.rpm x11-server-devel-1.20.7-1.mga7.i586.rpm x11-server-source-1.20.7-1.mga7.noarch.rpm x11-server-xdmx-1.20.7-1.mga7.i586.rpm x11-server-xephyr-1.20.7-1.mga7.i586.rpm x11-server-xnest-1.20.7-1.mga7.i586.rpm x11-server-xorg-1.20.7-1.mga7.i586.rpm x11-server-xvfb-1.20.7-1.mga7.i586.rpm x11-server-xwayland-1.20.7-1.mga7.i586.rpm libepoxy0-1.5.4-1.mga7.i586.rpm libepoxy-devel-1.5.4-1.mga7.i586.rpm x86_64: x11-server-1.20.7-1.mga7.x86_64.rpm x11-server-common-1.20.7-1.mga7.x86_64.rpm x11-server-devel-1.20.7-1.mga7.x86_64.rpm x11-server-source-1.20.7-1.mga7.noarch.rpm x11-server-xdmx-1.20.7-1.mga7.x86_64.rpm x11-server-xephyr-1.20.7-1.mga7.x86_64.rpm x11-server-xnest-1.20.7-1.mga7.x86_64.rpm x11-server-xorg-1.20.7-1.mga7.x86_64.rpm x11-server-xvfb-1.20.7-1.mga7.x86_64.rpm x11-server-xwayland-1.20.7-1.mga7.x86_64.rpm lib64epoxy0-1.5.4-1.mga7.x86_64.rpm lib64epoxy-devel-1.5.4-1.mga7.x86_64.rpm Ref: https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/xorg/2019-November/060001.html https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/xorg/2020-January/060037.html https://github.com/anholt/libepoxy/releases/tag/1.5.4
Blocks: (none) => 26315
Advisory, added to svn: type: bugfix subject: x11-server 1.20.7 src: 7: core: - x11-server-1.20.7-1.mga7 - libepoxy-1.5.4-1.mga7 description: | This update provides x11-server 1.20.7, containing a variety of bugfixes across the board, primarily in Xwayland, PRIME, modesetting and glamor support. It also includes GLX vendor selection support and support for choosing the DRI driver via EGL_MESA_query_driver. references: - https://bugs.mageia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=26312 - https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/xorg/2019-November/060001.html - https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/xorg/2020-January/060037.html - https://github.com/anholt/libepoxy/releases/tag/1.5.4
Keywords: (none) => advisory
mga7, x86_64, nvidia graphics. Updated or installed all the packages. No ill effects after a couple of hours running, mainly in Plasma, Xfce and Mate. Tried GNOME (Wayland probably) and GNOME on Xorg. Video, image viewing, firefox all good.
CC: (none) => tarazed25
Should this be tested at the same time as the mesa 20.x update(Bug 26315), or separately? And if separately, which should be tested first? Or does it make a difference?
CC: (none) => andrewsfarm
well, its better to test this one first before the mesa update to easier pinpoint possible regressions in x11 stack And this one will get out before (or at the same time as) mesa
Thank you for the reply. Trying this one first, then.
i5-2500, 16GB RAM, Integrated Intel graphics, 64-bit Plasma system. The following 4 packages are going to be installed: - lib64epoxy0-1.5.4-1.mga7.x86_64 - x11-server-common-1.20.7-1.mga7.x86_64 - x11-server-xorg-1.20.7-1.mga7.x86_64 - x11-server-xwayland-1.20.7-1.mga7.x86_64 All packages installed cleanly. Rebooted, just because it seemed like the thing to do, and have used this for a while. So far, so good.
OK 64 bit on my "svarten": Mainboard: Sabertooth P67, CPU: i7-3770, RAM 16G, Nvidia GTX760 (GK104) using nvidia-current; GeForce 635 series and later for a few hours i have surfed, used Libreoffice, virtualbox vith MSW7 and video in firefox, while boinc on host use CPU:S, no problems noted.
CC: (none) => fri
Tested on 32-bit hardware, Dell Inspiron 5100, P4, Radeon RV200 graphics, Atheros wifi, 32-bit Xfce system. Packages installed cleanly. Rebooted to a working desktop, no regressions noted. Calling this OK for 32-bits.
Whiteboard: (none) => MGA7-32-OK
on mga7-64 kernel-desktop plasma: packages installed cleanly: - lib64epoxy0-1.5.4-1.mga7.x86_64 - x11-server-common-1.20.7-1.mga7.x86_64 - x11-server-xorg-1.20.7-1.mga7.x86_64 - x11-server-xwayland-1.20.7-1.mga7.x86_64 looks OK for mga7-64 on this system: Mobo: Dell model: 09WH54 v: UEFI [Legacy]: Dell v: 2.13.1 CPU: Intel Core i7-6700 Graphics: Intel HD Graphics 530 (Skylake GT2)
CC: (none) => jim
Tested along with kernel 5.5.8 and mesa 20. Al Ok with 32 bits Pentium M 740, Radeon R300M graphics.
CC: (none) => lists.jjorge
MGA7-64 Plasma on Lenovo B50 No installation issues. Noticed that no previous version of the x11-server package was installed n this laptop running Plasma for a few months now. The packages x11-server-common and x11-server-xorg were there and updated. After the update rebooted the laptop and cann't see any ill effect, so I am wondering what the x11-server package is doing now, if anything at all. I will not object OK for 64bit.
CC: (none) => herman.viaene
Wanted to try this on AMD/Radeon hardware before passing it along, so... AMD Phenom II X4 910, 8GB RAM, Radeon HD 8490 graphics, Atheros wifi, 64-bit Plasma system. Installed the same packages as in Comment 9. Packages installed cleanly. After a reboot, no issues noted. Sending ths on its way. Validating.
Whiteboard: MGA7-32-OK => MGA7-32-OK MGA7-64-OKKeywords: (none) => validated_updateCC: (none) => sysadmin-bugs
An update for this issue has been pushed to the Mageia Updates repository. https://advisories.mageia.org/MGAA-2020-0077.html
Status: NEW => RESOLVEDResolution: (none) => FIXED