[xwin-discuss] Poor X11 performance in snv_91?

2008-08-04 Thread John Martin
Chris Ridd wrote: I've just rebooted into snv94, and the intrstat figures are back down in the 100 range. I guess I'll keep watching out to see if they go bezerk again. I forgot to mention, the nvidia driver in snv94 has *experimental* support for not generating vertical blank

[xwin-discuss] Poor X11 performance in snv_91?

2008-07-31 Thread Chris Ridd
On 30 Jul 2008, at 23:02, John Martin wrote: Chris Ridd wrote: It (a Dell Precision 470) appears to just have a single switch to disable the USB controller. My kbd and mouse are both USB (looks like they're on uhci#2), so disabling USB entirely would make the machine hard to use

[xwin-discuss] Poor X11 performance in snv_91?

2008-07-30 Thread John Martin
Chris Ridd wrote: It (a Dell Precision 470) appears to just have a single switch to disable the USB controller. My kbd and mouse are both USB (looks like they're on uhci#2), so disabling USB entirely would make the machine hard to use :-) Can you do: # echo ::prtusb | mdb -k It

[xwin-discuss] Poor X11 performance in snv_91?

2008-07-08 Thread John Martin
Chris Ridd wrote: Anyway, after trying to create another BE with a downgraded driver, I rebooted back into opensolaris-2, aka snv_91, and the graphics performance is good again. Looking at the Xorg.0.log file from the previous snv_91 boot, I do see some differences: I don't see the

[xwin-discuss] Poor X11 performance in snv_91?

2008-07-08 Thread Chris Ridd
John Martin wrote: Chris Ridd wrote: John Martin wrote: Chris Ridd wrote: Anyway, after trying to create another BE with a downgraded driver, I rebooted back into opensolaris-2, aka snv_91, and the graphics performance is good again. Looking at the Xorg.0.log file from the previous

[xwin-discuss] Poor X11 performance in snv_91?

2008-07-07 Thread Chris Ridd
I'm noticing that my 2 machines running snv_91 appear to be running quite slowly compared to snv_90. In particular, moving windows around on screen shows background windows (eg gnome-terminal, firefox, thunderbird) repainting themselves very slowly. The desktop box has an Nvidia NV43GL [Quadro

[xwin-discuss] Poor X11 performance in snv_91?

2008-07-07 Thread Alan Coopersmith
Chris Ridd wrote: John Martin wrote: Chris Ridd wrote: I'm noticing that my 2 machines running snv_91 appear to be running quite slowly compared to snv_90. In particular, moving windows around on screen shows background windows (eg gnome-terminal, firefox, thunderbird) repainting

[xwin-discuss] Poor X11 performance in snv_91?

2008-07-07 Thread Chris Ridd
Alan Coopersmith wrote: The root and /usr pages were merged into a single package for IPS for most packages in Solaris, since IPS doesn't need to keep them seperate for zones/diskless support as SVR4 packages did, so the IPS NVDAgraphics includes the contents of both the NVDAgraphicsr and

[xwin-discuss] Poor X11 performance in snv_91?

2008-07-07 Thread Alan Coopersmith
Chris Ridd wrote: Alan Coopersmith wrote: The root and /usr pages were merged into a single package for IPS for most packages in Solaris, since IPS doesn't need to keep them seperate for zones/diskless support as SVR4 packages did, so the IPS NVDAgraphics includes the contents of both the

[xwin-discuss] Poor X11 performance in snv_91?

2008-07-07 Thread John Martin
Chris Ridd wrote: Alan Coopersmith wrote: The root and /usr pages were merged into a single package for IPS for most packages in Solaris, since IPS doesn't need to keep them seperate for zones/diskless support as SVR4 packages did, so the IPS NVDAgraphics includes the contents of both the