Thanks for all the testing, and thanks for the (now merged) patch, Pavel. >>> >>> I'd be grateful if folks gave it a try; feedback is greatly appreciated. >> >> It works nicely, I noticed that cpu usage is 100% all the time (even >> when no client is connected). > > My cpu usage is okay (below 50%), memory is fine as well. I have a small > delay, about 500 ms. I only gave it a quick try but let us know any > tests we could be doing to help here. Actually, the CPU usage is not surprising; the screen scanning, particularly for large displays, does not yet back off under periods of light activity. There is another issue I'm mentally chewing on, which is the way it handles a 'worst case' - e.g. x11perf doing 1x1 draws over and over again. In the former case, we want to back off scanning and lean on damage reports; in the latter case, we want to ignore damage reports and just scan. The other fairly substantive issue I mean to tackle yet is to provide some form of caching for the shared memory segments (right now, it's simplistic; just alloc, use, and free). First I have to benchmark to determine if they are inefficient, and if they are, then I think having a reusable cache should provide a nice speed up as well. I'm glad it's broadly usable; I hope to have a patch attacking the CPU usage sometime fairly soon. Cheers, Jeremy _______________________________________________ Spice-devel mailing list Spice-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel