On Die, 2002-02-26 at 15:34, Vladimir Dergachev wrote: > > > On 26 Feb 2002, Michel [ISO-8859-1] Dänzer wrote: > > > On Son, 2002-02-24 at 16:26, Vladimir Dergachev wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Fri, 22 Feb 2002, Peter Surda wrote: > > > > > > > On Fri, Feb 22, 2002 at 01:38:36AM +0100, Michel Dänzer wrote: > > > > > > BEFORE the "if", X load sinks by about 20% during video playing, BOTH when > > > > > > using dri (25->5) or not using DRI (50->30) > > > > > > When I put it AFTER the if, the load doesn't change (25 with dri, 50 >without). > > > > > Hmm. I don't suppose the R128DMA() call per se imposes such a high load? > > > > No, I also tested it inside R128RMA (for the cases DMA is working) and inside > > > > the "if" cycle for cases it isn't. It is not (directly) R128DMA that is > > > > causing this, or memcpy, but as these functions take a lot of time to complete > > > > (about 10ms for DVD-sized picture), I guess it is something that > > > > asynchronously does a busy loop waiting for R128PutImage to complete. But why > > > > a wisely placed usleep seems to (mostly) cure the symptoms remains a mystery > > > > to me. > > > > > > Hmm.. Michel, Peter, is it possible that "poll" function in DRM driver is > > > screwed up ? Though I thought that texture transfer goes through an ioctl.. > > > > It does, and Peter says the cycles are wasted in user space, or what are > > you getting at? > > Michel, correct me if I am wrong, but I thought the cycles will be counted > as "system" time only if we call schedule when inside the kernel, right ?
Maybe, I don't know the hairy details. Anyway, I forgot to mention the main point: Peter observes the same effect with and without DRI so it can't be related to the DRM. -- Earthling Michel Dänzer (MrCooper)/ Debian GNU/Linux (powerpc) developer XFree86 and DRI project member / CS student, Free Software enthusiast _______________________________________________ Dri-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel
