On Thu, 2009-08-13 at 11:01 +0200, Michel Dänzer wrote: > Hmm. One thing I notice is that there's almost no EXA offscreen memory, > due to your enormous Virtual directive. Normally this should only affect > performance, not correctness, but it might be worth trying a smaller > maximum desktop size just in case. >
Hello, I tried different configurations for my Virtual screen. Here are the logs (hope I've picked the right lines!): Virtual: 2944x1848 (BIG) (II) EXA(0): Offscreen pixmap area of 786432 bytes VirtuaL: NONE (II) EXA(0): Offscreen pixmap area of 11436032 bytes Virtual: 1920x1848 (VERTICAL) (II) EXA(0): Offscreen pixmap area of 12255232 bytes VirtuaL: 2944x1080 (HORIZONTAL) (II) EXA(0): Offscreen pixmap area of 14352384 bytes I thought that the configuration with most free memory would have been the second one (no virtual screen) but surprisingly to me it is not the case. Now I'm using the 2944x1080 (HORIZONTAL) Virtual screen with AGPMode 4 (default) and DRI enabled. The issues I had seem to be gone. However I cannot activate Compositing when I use my external screen since X consumes almost the 80% of the CPU when I move the windows around the screen. If I use my laptop monitor (1024x768) Compositing works quite well, although I experienced some lock-ups when I tried to modify the options of gnome-do in order to activate the "Docky". Can we consider this bug closed? Can you do anything to prevent users to make the same mistakes I made? Thank you, Stefano -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-x-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org