On Sun, Jun 26, 2016 at 2:04 PM, Andy Lutomirski <luto@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Eeek! My desire to hack on EXA is pretty low. If there was some Well, the EXA hacking was all done a long time ago. You'd just need to add support for sticking 4 vertices into a buffer. (Maxwell killed direct vertex submit, which was incredibly convenient for the DDX.) > straightforward way I could try to figure out why GLAMOR was so slow, > maybe I could fiddle with that a bit. Upgrade mesa & pray. I think that X11 can end up being pretty glReadPixels-heavy, which in a UMA system is ~free, but much more expensive when the FB is in VRAM. Recently some changes were committed to cache the entire texture in a staging texture if someone does a lot of readpixels on it. Could help. Or could be totally unrelated. You could do an apitrace of the X server (github.com/apitrace/apitrace) and then analyze what all it's doing. > > FWIW, my i915-based laptop uses the modesetting driver and GLAMOR as > well, and it's plenty fast, so I don't think the problem is that > GLAMOR is inherently terrible at legacy X11 operations. Different workloads, I suppose. I had to use GLAMOR on a SKL while the regular ddx was still lacking support for it, and my favorite screensaver was unbearably slow on it (xlock -mode wator, in case you're curious). [And regular usage was also not great, but not to the point of frustration.] It runs plenty fast with the SNA backend though. -ilia _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
