On Wed, 2007-08-29 at 06:46 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > ok, i finally managed to reproduce the "artifact" myself on an older > box. It goes like this: start up X with the vesa driver (or with NoDRI) > to force software rendering. Then start up a couple of glxgears > instances. Those glxgears instances update in a very "chunky", > "stuttering" way - each glxgears instance runs/stops/runs/stops at a > rate of a about once per second, and this was reported to me as a > potential CPU scheduler regression. Hmm. I can't even run two copies of glxgears on software GL code today; it's broken in every X server I have available. Someone broke it a while ago, but no-one noticed. However, this shouldn't be GLX related as the software rasterizer is no different from any other rendering code. Testing with my smart-scheduler case (many copies of 'plaid') shows that at least with git master, things are working as designed. When GLX is working again, I'll try that as well. > at a quick glance this is not a CPU scheduler thing: X uses up 99% of > CPU time, all the glxgears tasks (i needed 8 parallel instances to see > the stallings) are using up the remaining 1% of CPU time. The ordering > of the requests from the glxgears tasks is X's choice - and for a > pathological overload situation like this we cannot blame X at all for > not producing a completely smooth output. (although Xorg could perhaps > try to schedule such requests more smoothly, in a more finegrained way?) It does. It should switch between clients ever 20ms; that's why X spends so much time asking the kernel for the current time. Make sure the X server isn't running with the smart scheduler disabled; that will cause precisely the symptoms you're seeing here. In the normal usptream sources, you'd have to use '-dumbSched' as an X server command line option. The old 'scheduler' would run an entire X client's input buffer dry before looking for requests from another client. Because glxgears requests are small but time consuming, this can cause very long delays between client switching. -- [email protected]
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: CFS review
- From: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>
- Re: CFS review
- References:
- Re: CFS review
- From: Al Boldi <[email protected]>
- Re: CFS review
- From: Al Boldi <[email protected]>
- Re: CFS review
- From: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>
- Re: CFS review
- From: Al Boldi <[email protected]>
- Re: CFS review
- From: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>
- Re: CFS review
- From: Keith Packard <[email protected]>
- Re: CFS review
- From: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>
- Re: CFS review
- Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH 0/6] writeback time order/delay fixes take 3
- Next by Date: Re: cpufreq affects traffic control rates
- Previous by thread: Re: CFS review
- Next by thread: Re: CFS review
- Index(es):