On Sat, May 29, 2010 at 04:21:46PM +0200, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> On Sam, 2010-05-29 at 15:02 +0200, Sylvain Beucler wrote:
> > On Sat, May 29, 2010 at 01:05:36PM +0200, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> > > On Sam, 2010-05-29 at 10:21 +0200, Sylvain Beucler wrote:
> > > >
> > > > The attached simple test runs at 17FPS in KMS mode on my computer,
> > > > against 300FPS in non-KMS mode.
> > >
> > > Forgot to mention: sysprof or oprofile profiles of slow and fast runs
> > > might be interesting, at least if the CPU is pegged during the runs.
> >
> > Here are 2 sysprof runs:
> > - UMS / fast:
> > - kernel 11.25%
> > - X 77.20%
> > - KMS / slow:
> > - kernel 90.28%
> > - X 5.79%
>
> Unfortunately, there's no information about where in the kernel the
> cycles are burnt. This information should be available with sysprof
> 1.1.x and a kernel with the performance counter/event framework.
Quite a nice tool:
__libc_start_main 0,00% 93,67%
_start 0,02% 87,66%
In file /usr/bin/Xorg 0,13% 87,64%
In file /usr/lib/xorg/modules/libexa.so 0,04% 86,60%
In file /usr/lib/xorg/modules/drivers/radeon_drv.so 0,08% 86,48%
radeon_bo_open 0,00% 79,87%
In file /usr/lib/libdrm_radeon.so.1.0.0 0,00% 79,87%
drmCommandWriteRead 0,00% 79,86%
__kernel_vsyscall 0,00% 79,86%
- - kernel - - 0,00% 79,86%
on_each_cpu 36,81% 36,81%
__purge_vmap_area_lazy 20,31% 20,31%
flush_all_zero_pkmaps 7,84% 7,84%
vm_unmap_aliases 1,65% 1,65%
What do you think that means?
> Anyway, this probably means it's an issue in the kernel, not the X
> driver. May be solved already in newer kernels, there have been some AGP
> performance improvements which I'm not sure have made it into Debian's
> 2.6.32 DRM backport.
--
Sylvain
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-x-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100529153352.ga2...@perso.beuc.net
