<html> <head> <meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type"> </head> <body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"> <div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 8/16/2013 10:42 AM, Federico Leoni wrote: </div> <blockquote cite="mid:CAFe6bgVkTFSBgOFSJbbySuSMHvw4HwdN3ngJSUW49BDcQLoQbg@mail.gmail.com" type="cite"> Em 16/08/2013 11:36, "John Hupp" <<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:lubuntu@prpcompany.com">lubuntu@prpcompany.com</a>> escreveu: > > On 8/14/2013 6:20 PM, John Hupp wrote: >> >> On 8/13/2013 4:47 PM, Nio Wiklund wrote: >>> >>> On 2013-08-13 20:46, John Hupp wrote: >>>> >>>> Here is a fresh summary (with one new result) of the problem on machines >>>> with integrated Intel graphics in which Adobe Flash Player 11.2 displays >>>> only with shades of purple and green in a horizontally compressed window. >>>> >>>> (My current example is a Dell Dimension 2400 on Raring.) >>>> >>>> In my testing with the Intel driver using its default acceleration: >>>> - Flash 11.2 works on Quantal with the 3.5 kernel >>>> - Flash 11.2 works on Raring with the 3.5 kernel ** >>>> - Flash 11.8 works on Raring with the 3.8 kernel (in Chrome) >>>> - Flash 11.2 fails on Raring with the 3.8 kernel >>>> - Flash 11.2 fails on Saucy with its default kernel >>>> >>>> Disabling Flash *hardware* acceleration altogether (via R-click in the >>>> Flash display window: Settings: General tab) did not fix the problem. >>>> >>>> Setting the Intel driver's acceleration method to UXA rather than its >>>> default SNA *always* fixes the Flash problem, but causes a garbled login >>>> screen under LightDM that so far has no workaround. >>>> >>>> I also tried one possible fix for the default Intel SNA acceleration >>>> using the TearFree option. I created >>>> /etc/X11/xorg.conf.d/20-intel.conf with contents: >>>> Section "Device" >>>> Identifier "Intel Graphics" >>>> Driver "intel" >>>> Option "AccelMethod" "sna" >>>> Option "TearFree" "true" >>>> EndSection >>>> But this had no effect. >>>> >>>> There was a helpful bug report on file at >>>> <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/1178982">http://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/1178982</a>. (Note that >>>> it was filed against Linux.) Workarounds posted there were to change >>>> the Xorg acceleration method to UXA, or boot with an older kernel. The >>>> bug was closed only because the original poster didn't have possession >>>> of the machine anymore. >>>> >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>> >>>> ** Flash sort of works in this case. The colors and window dimensions >>>> are normal. But there were other odd display-related effects. Raring >>>> booting to a a low-resolution desktop with the mouse pointer locked. I >>>> started Chromium via the keyboard and the flash video played long enough >>>> for me to see normal colors/dimensions, but then it locked up the browser. >>>> >>>> In my interest in testing under Raring with an older kernel, I initially >>>> tried to use a Live USB with persistence and follow the instructions at >>>> <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Kernel/MainlineBuilds">https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Kernel/MainlineBuilds</a> for installing older >>>> Mainline kernels. But this failed to install/run properly with the Live >>>> USB. And besides, I wanted to use Stock rather than Mainline kernels. >>>> So I installed a different hard drive, installed Quantal, then upgraded >>>> to Raring. I suppose if I had run Software Update under Quantal, I >>>> would have gotten a 3.6 kernel to test as well. As it was, Raring's >>>> Software Update did not install a 3.6 kernel, but only the kernel >>>> updates proper to Raring. >>>> >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>> >>>> Looking at the above behavior of the "black box" without nearly enough >>>> technical knowledge, all I can see at this point is that there is an >>>> adverse interplay between certain versions of the kernel, the Intel >>>> driver, and Flash. (And I grant that I have not documented the versions >>>> of the Intel driver in the various cases, but no one has given me any >>>> indication that the Intel driver version is an issue here.) >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> Hi John, >>> >>> If I remember correctly, it does not work to install other kernels in >>> persistent live systems. You can update and or install other program >>> packages, but not kernels. An installed system on a USB drive will not >>> suffer from such problems. >>> >>> Were you able to use that method to update kernels in Raring? >>> >>> Best regards >>> Nio >> >> >> Thanks, Nio. >> >> Though I still haven't tried installing other kernels in an installed system on a flash drive, today I used the method at <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://wiki.ubuntu.com/Kernel/MainlineBuilds">http://wiki.ubuntu.com/Kernel/MainlineBuilds</a> to test other mainline kernels on the temporarily-installed hard drive I describe above. (I'd still like to know if there is a similar archive of stock kernels somewhere, though perhaps all the stock kernels are right there, identified by <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://kernel.ubuntu.com/%7Ekernel-ppa/info/kernel-version-map.html">http://kernel.ubuntu.com/~kernel-ppa/info/kernel-version-map.html</a> <<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://kernel.ubuntu.com/%7Ekernel-ppa/info/kernel-version-map.html">http://kernel.ubuntu.com/%7Ekernel-ppa/info/kernel-version-map.html</a>>.) >> >> I found that Flash 11.2 works normally on Raring with the last 3.6 and 3.7 mainline kernels, but fails with the latest mainline kernel, 3.11.0-031100rc5. >> >> Together with my earlier test results (above), this seemed to me to provide enough indications to file a bug against the kernel, which I have just done at <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/1212455">http://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/1212455</a>. >> > > After a little back-and-forth concerning my bug report, one of the Buntu kernel maintainers suggested that I move the bug upstream. > > Step #1 in that process is to send a specifically formatted report to the email list of the team for the relevant kernel module. So after a little research, it seemed that this would be the Intel DRM Driver. > > The online archive of the thread begins with my email at <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/dri-devel/2013-August/043876.html">http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/dri-devel/2013-August/043876.html</a> > > Happily for me as regards my time investment on this problem, but perhaps unhappily as regards fixing the problem, Chris Wilson from the Intel Open Source Technology Centre rendered this summary judgment in a reply: > > "It's a flash bug. They ignore the format of the Window that they PutImage to. (Worse, they create an image of the right depth or else X would reject the PutImage with a BadMatch and then render incorrect pixel data into it.)" > > If his assessment is on the mark, and if you have a PC with affected Intel graphics that you want to display Flash content, it would seem that the only recourse is to install a supported non-Intel video card. > > > -- > Lubuntu-users mailing list > <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:Lubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com">Lubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com</a> > Modify settings or unsubscribe at: <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/lubuntu-users">https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/lubuntu-users</a> John, I'm just wondering... Did you test the closed driver for Intel integrated video? <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="https://01.org/linuxgraphics/">https://01.org/linuxgraphics/</a> Just curious to see if it works better... F. </blockquote> No, I didn't have a clue about that option. I may try it later today. Just after posting above, it occurred to me that there is another question to ask: What about the workaround for the workaround? That is, there is the workaround (setting the Intel driver to use UXA acceleration instead of the default SNA; this fixes the Flash problem but results in a garbled login screen). But I have wondered if we can work around that with some configuration of LightDM or its GTK Greeter, or if it would be reasonable on affected PC's to replace LightDM with another display manager that might not suffer from the same effect. (And how one would do any of the above.) Most people would have probably given up and gone a different route by now, but I have 4 of these Dell Dimension 2400's here, another couple Dell Dimension cousins that probably also have affected Intel graphics, and one wonders about other machines that may also have affected Intel graphics. </body> </html>