I understand all those reasons, the difference is I'm just going to have to
start telling people like this ->

http://forums.bodhilinux.com/index.php?/topic/7701-enlightenment-cpu-usage-at-98-on-intel-i810/

That they simply can't use E17 because it will eat all of their CPU all the
time with compositing :-/

Personally I use compositing on all my system, it looks great in general.


On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 10:26 PM, Carsten Haitzler <ras...@rasterman.com>wrote:

> On Mon, 21 Jan 2013 10:51:01 -0600 Jeff Hoogland <jeffhoogl...@linux.com>
> said:
>
> > Raster had mentioned on IRC last night that compositing had become
> > non-optional in SVN builds already. What is the reason for this? I
> > understand compositing is the future - but forcing it on everyone it
> going
> > to make E much less usable on legacy hardware - a place where it really
> > shines.
>
> reasons:
>
> 1. aesthetics. having to "design" for both compositing and non-compositing
> is
> limiting and painful.
> 2. code simplification - this cuts down mem usage and resource usage where
> we
> make non-compositing code paths redundant (never loaded) or even get
> totally
> removed. it also makes e and efl's code MUCH easier to maintain as we cut
> out a
> whole class of pain.
> 3. if you do non-compositing, then your other option is avoid anything that
> isnt a pure rectangle.. or use shapes... do u have any idea how inefficient
> shaped windows are? do you know how they are implemented? compositing is
> MORE
> efficient than shaped windows except for the most trivial shape cases. it
> also
> has fewer artefacts. don't make me do a rundown on the actual
> implementation of
> xshape etc... i have little enough time as-is. take if from someone who
> started
> doing x shape stuff back in 1996...
> 4. wayland - we cant sensibly become a wayland compositor without ALWAYS
> compositing.
> 5. compositing only allows us to move content out of windows (eg the
> container
> bg window that holds a canvas with wallpaper and your efm icons etc.) and
> merge
> it into the COMPOSITOR canvas. this reduces mem footrpint drastically -
> example. you have a 1600x1200 screen. you have a 1600x1200 walllpaper. e
> will
> keep the rgba pixels for that wallpaper inside its memory because it
> renders
> them to the bg canvas with software. this bg canvas is a window..that is
> composited.. this means this window consumes at least 1 pixmap of memory...
> that means 1600x1200 (8mb) for the original PLUS 8mb for the composited
> pixmap.. to store essentially the same content PLUS some icons. if we move
> it
> into the compositor canvas we get:
>
> 1. wallpaper image is rendered and scaled by the same enigne as the
> compositor
> (sw or gl).
> 2. only the original wp image is needed, not an intermediate window
> pixmap. we
> save 8mb of memory insnantly.
> 3. evas already has caches for scaled data and can throw out original data
> etc.
> so we also recycle this infra directly.
> 4. "animated" wallpapers now get faster as they render with gl... as do
> wallpaper transitions etc.
>
> repeat for everything else in e17... it all goes into the compositor canvas
> EXCEPT "window content" (client windows - be they e's internal dialogs or
> external apps - to e's compositor these will just be image objects - they
> currently are, but they also include the frame window sections
> (borders/titles)
> provided by e - these will be split out to live in the canvas).
> 6. if objects move into the comp canvas - like window borders, menus,
> shelves... we solve the clipping problem. right now borders, shelves, menus
> etc. get clipped by their window. that's life. once they live in the comp
> canvas they can extend beyond their object bounds (add glows, shadows,
> other
> effects or pixels/imagery extending beyond their bounds). this comes for
> "free"
> when moving into evas and out of a window and that is part of the plan - to
> migrate content all into the compositor canvas.
> 7. i can go on... (tldr time - you asked "why" so read, or never ask again
> :))
> this has been talked about a lot amongst devs already. it's not possible
> to do
> non-compositing AND compositing and move forward. we have little enough
> developer resources as-is. this simplifies and allows us to have a future.
> the
> fact that we BOTHERED to have fast software compositing is a big part of
> the
> commitment to make compositing work for EVERYONE - you DONT need a
> "supported
> gpu + driver" to use it. yes - it means extra system load, and slowdowns
> for
> those avoiding compositing now entirely - but that's the price of progress.
> we've "lowered" the cost, but it isn't "free". no one is totally LEFT OUT.
> the
> software compositor works even in 16bpp (with extra overhead though). and
> 8bpp .. well ok - sorry 8bpp people. if you can only do 8bpp then we're
> leaving
> you behind. sorry. 1995 will be happy to keep you. :( we CAN reduce
> overhead of
> software compositing still - it's heavy because we HAVE to copy pixels
> from x
> (read data via x(shm)getimage). we can't fix that unless we can get a
> zero-copy
> path. x allows us no such path for software (shared pixmaps are not an
> option
> fyi). we COULD shortcut this path - but we need to do it at BOTH sides of
> the
> pipeline. that means modify toolkits/apps. we CAN modify efl to bypass x
> entirely for rendering and only use it for focus/input/events and use a
> back-channel shared memory system to export pixel buffers direct from
> client to
> comp. it's doable. we'd cut overhead in half for copies as we... get rid of
> them (we only have now rendering overehead). *IF* comp also bypasses x's fb
> management and goes direct to fbdev or kms... and does evil stuff... we can
> ALSO make "rendered pixel uploads" totally free. ie zero copy buffer
> swaps. -
> then the ONLY overhead we have is filling the comp "backbuffer". what you
> may
> not be aware of is.. evas ALREADY has this infra. it can already do this
> little
> zero-copy buffer swap trick... all the code is there.. it's even been
> tested
> with real drivers that do support this - there is even a virtual buffer
> swap
> emulation layer to test it if you don't have such a magic driver....
> BUT... it
> requires driver work to make this possible - or bypassing x's fb driver
> entirely... but we can already do this kind of stuff. we're FAR from
> maximum
> optimal level in sw compositing. in fact if we did both of the above for
> things
> like scrolling your browser window around we'd basically increase
> framerate by
> 3 times compared to now. that's our existing potential upside if we plug
> all
> the bits together. we're far from pure ultimate potential, and even being
> far
> from it.. we are very usable on low end systems. so without a gpu to
> accelerate
> it all and make it all zero-copy... we have a potential upside (for efl
> apps)
> of up to 3 TIMES faster (and a minimum of 2 times faster). for non-efl
> epps up
> to 2 TIMES faster. though at this point.. we're almost being a wayland
> style
> compositor directly, so i'm wondering if we'll ever bother with x stuff to
> optimize this far and just jump to being wayland from there, as wayland is
> all
> about sending buffers around and avoiding copies... efl already lends
> itself
> very well to this. it already has the start of a wayland port and a wayland
> compositor in e17. and as above... we cant move to doing wayland stuff
> unless
> we move to being "compositing only". keeping mind "compositing only" does
> not
> EXCLUDe optimizations like "zeo copy/composite" you do for things like
> fullscreen windows (games etc.). if you do this just right you can take the
> client pixel buffer it sends you (it sends a handle to it - it doesn't
> COPY it
> to you) and you just program the gfx chipset to pint the real hw buffer
> scanout
> to the client buffer. ALL the compositor is doing is updating where the fb
> points to... it's doing zero actual compositing/copying/blending work in
> this
> case. its turles... err.. zero copy all the way down. so your games are not
> affected at all. if at any point some menu or dialog appears on top.. it
> begins
> compositing again for that frame on until that overlayed window goes away.
> given smart enough compositing and the right hardware you can EVEN avoid
> compositing in such simple scenarios.. a lot of hardware supports RGBA
> OVERLAYS
> - multiple buffers blended on top of eachother. your hw mouse cursor is
> exactly
> such an overlay buffer. "xv video acceleration uses such a wh buffer often
> too
> - but its yuv, not rgba... but same principle. a smart compositor can
> PROGRAM
> the overlay buffer to point to this "popup menu/dialog" and keep the 2
> framebuffers totally separate... zero compositing/copies... until the 3 of
> windows becomes too complex to point directly at hw buffer layers, then it
> has
> to start compositing for real... my point here is... this is the path we
> MUST
> go down. we NEED to. wayland is being designed for this.. and they're
> right.
> this is how u get zero-tearing smooth screen updates with minimal overhead.
> it's a fundamental shift in perspective from copying pixels to a single
> shared
> framebuffer with clip rects, but it is the reality of most hardware you
> already
> have from phones through to set top boxes, tablets, laptops and desktops.
> you
> just don't know it. most of these capabilities lie idle and unused because
> our
> display system is too "old school" AND because of nay-sayers holding back
> progress saying "waaaa - i don't want compositing!". reality is that
> basically
> anyone who KNOWS graphics, hw and infra all the way down to these nuts and
> bolts is already in agreement - this is the way to go. we agree because we
> know
> what is actually going on behind the scenes. the decision to be compositing
> only is a big step - but in the right direction. suffice to say, that if
> you
> don't "get it" now, in a few years, you will. the penny may drop. maybe for
> some it won't - you may be the same people who think a green screen vt100
> is
> all u ever need. pixels are useless. color is a waste of memory. reality
> is...
> sticking to non-composited displays is as useful as sticking to a vt100
> attached to a 192000 baud serial line. :)
>
> --
> ------------- Codito, ergo sum - "I code, therefore I am" --------------
> The Rasterman (Carsten Haitzler)    ras...@rasterman.com
>
>


-- 
~Jeff Hoogland <http://jeffhoogland.com/>
Thoughts on Technology <http://jeffhoogland.blogspot.com/>, Tech Blog
Bodhi Linux <http://bodhilinux.com/>, Enlightenment for your Desktop
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Master Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL, ASP.NET, C# 2012, HTML5, CSS,
MVC, Windows 8 Apps, JavaScript and much more. Keep your skills current
with LearnDevNow - 3,200 step-by-step video tutorials by Microsoft
MVPs and experts. ON SALE this month only -- learn more at:
http://p.sf.net/sfu/learnnow-d2d
_______________________________________________
enlightenment-users mailing list
enlightenment-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-users

Reply via email to