On Thu, 2011-06-16 at 01:39 +0200, Alon Levy wrote: > On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 04:08:43PM -0400, John A. Sullivan III wrote: > > Since we were having some trouble as just outlined on our Windows tests, > > we thought we would let SPICE put its best foot forward and try a Fedora > > 15 guest running on a Fedora 15 KVM host. > > Heh, seeing as windows support is much more advanced that is not quite how > I'd put it. Certainly we are working on putting linux on equal footing, but > the most work so far has gone into the windows driver, not the linux one. > > > > > When it worked, it was amazing. However, most of the time, the system > > was barely responsive and the X process was consuming 100% of the CPU. > > We initially thought this might be from KDE4 so we installed twm and > > experienced the same. We then launched a few applications without any > > Windows Manager at all and saw the same results. > > > > Alon was helpful on IRC and mentioned that it was because there was no > > kernel module for the driver. > > Maybe that seemed implied, but I didn't mean it like that. I just mentioned > this in passing, that a kernel module doesn't exist. The main thing we could > use a kernel module for is interrupt support. But spice works without that as > well, since the communication is done asynchronously most of the time from > host to guest (and this is the only place where an interrupt is useful - to > wakeup the guest occasionally). > > > > > Does this mean that there is no driver for the QXL driver and thus it > > runs in user space and drives up the utilization? If so, what are people > > doing who are running this in production? > > > > This leads to another question. Our understanding is that rendering is > > done on the client and not the guest unless the client is unable to do > > so (haven't read enough on the protocol to understand how this is > > determined). Does this mean that, in cases where rendering is happening > > on the guest that a high end graphics card in the physical host would > > improve performance? Our experience with using NX is that the physical > > hardware is never involved but that is a completely different paradigm. > > > > Rendering is done on the client always. It is also done on the server if > the guest requires the results of rendering, which can happen for instance > when you do a print screen. > > > If the rendering is taking place on the client, why is the lack of a > > kernel module for QXL causing a problem? Thanks - John > > Not the problem. The problem is simply in the X driver, and perhaps you can > supply > some more details to allow to reproduce the 100% cpu scenario? <snip> Hello, all. This is still an issue for us. What additional information can we provide to help resolve this problem? Thanks - John
_______________________________________________ Spice-devel mailing list Spice-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel
