On Tue, 2003-12-02 at 23:20, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > On Tue, 2003-12-02 at 23:13, Soeren Sonnenburg wrote: > > On Mon, 2003-12-01 at 23:38, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: [...] > What do you mean ? There is no way the new radeonfb would be slower > than the old one in 2.6. If you run in 8bpp, you won't get any better > without acceleration and the 2.6 radeonfb isn't accelerated (neither > the old one nor the new one). 2.4 was. I don't have time to look into > the accel code for 2.6 for now.
Now that you say that, I find that it might be some scheduling problem and not the radeonfb: When I start find /home for the first time it scrolls slowly. When I do it a second time it is still slow. But when I did it a third time it is superb fast (only 45sec vs some minutes / approx the same in xterm)... When I do it now it seems to accelerate... it starts slow but becomes much faster... Does that sound like being caused by the anticipated scheduler ? What I don't understand is why the cpu is at 100% while it was not with 2.4. > Regarding the fixes, just pick the 2 missing #define's in a tree without > my changes ;) I'll fix that asap in my tree. ah, ok. Soeren.