Hi Gerd, On Thu, Jan 20, 2022 at 4:29 AM Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, Jan 18, 2022 at 10:33:23AM +0200, Pekka Paalanen wrote: > > On Mon, 17 Jan 2022 19:47:39 +0100 > > Sven Schnelle <svens@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > I also tested the speed on my Thinkpad X1 with Intel graphics, and there > > > a dmesg with 919 lines one the text console took about 2s to display. In > > > x11, i measure 22ms. This might be unfair because encoding might be > > > different, but i cannot confirm the 'memcpy' is faster than hardware > > > blitting' point. I think if that would be the case, no-one would care > > > about 2D acceleration. > > > > I think that is an extremely unfair comparison, because a graphical > > terminal app is not going to render every line of text streamed to it. > > It probably renders only the final view alone if you simply run > > 'dmesg', skipping the first 800-900 lines completely. > > Probably more like "render on every vblank", but yes, unlike fbcon it > surely wouldn't render every single character sent to the terminal. > > Also acceleration on modern hardware is more like "compose window > content using the 3d engine" than "use 2d blitter to scroll the window". > > > Maybe fbcon should do the same when presented with a flood of text, > > but I don't know how or why it works like it works. > > fbcon could do the same, i.e. render to fbdev in a 60Hz timer instead of > doing it synchronously. Hopefully only the parts of the screen which need a redraw? Not all displays can be updated that fast. For a "modern" example, see https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/93070/. Gr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert -- Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that. -- Linus Torvalds
