On Montag, 20. November 2017 23:40:38 CET Milian Wolff wrote: > On Montag, 20. November 2017 17:28:06 CET Martin Flöser wrote: > > Am 2017-11-20 11:59, schrieb Milian Wolff: > > > On Samstag, 18. November 2017 15:34:16 CET Friedrich W. H. Kossebau > > > > > > wrote: > > >> Am Donnerstag, 16. November 2017, 23:24:52 CET schrieb Ingo Klöcker: > > >> > On Dienstag, 7. November 2017 20:55:57 CET Martin Flöser wrote: > > >> > > Am 2017-11-07 20:08, schrieb Martin Koller: > > >> > > >> Are you aware that KWin uses QtQuick for all its UI elements, > > >> > > >> such > > >> > > >> as > > >> > > >> Alt+TAB? > > >> > > > > > >> > > > I have deactivated the compositor since sadly it simply does not > > >> > > > work > > >> > > > on my laptop (the intel graphics driver just freezes the whole > > >> > > > machine). > > >> > > > > >> > > I did not talk about compositor, I talked about QtQuick! Yes, KWin > > >> > > uses > > >> > > QtQuick for rendering it's UI, that is unrelated to compositing. > > >> > > > > >> > > Now you mention that your intel graphics driver freezes the whole > > >> > > system. I'm using Intel on all my systems and it's the most used > > >> > > driver > > >> > > out there. We get many, many, many bug reports in KWin about > > >> > > issues. > > >> > > Freezing systems has not been in the list for now something like > > >> > > two > > >> > > years. > > >> > > > > >> > > Given that I am very certain that you have a hardware issue where > > >> > > people > > >> > > can help you with. Intel GPUs are good enough to run the Plasma > > >> > > session > > >> > > without any negative impact. > > >> > > > > >> > > So let us help you fix your issues that you can enjoy our work > > >> > > without > > >> > > having to spend time on writing your own shell. > > >> > > > > >> > > First thing: are you using the xorg-modesettings driver? If not: > > >> > > install > > >> > > it, problems solved. Do not (I repeat) do not use the xorg-intel > > >> > > driver. > > >> > > > > >> > > For kernel I recommend at least version 4.13 as this comes with the > > >> > > atomic modesettings driver stack enabled by default. If you do not > > >> > > have > > >> > > such a kernel version yet I highly recommend to give it a try. > > >> > > > >> > Martin, thanks a lot for your advice! > > >> > > > >> > I've suffered from freezes since I updated my openSUSE 13.2 to > > >> > Tumbleweed > > >> > some time ago (and much longer on my laptop where I've switched to > > >> > Leap > > >> > and > > >> > later Tumbleweed much earlier). > > >> > > >> Same here, happy to finally see someone with correlated experience. I > > >> never > > >> got any useful hints in the log files, so was close to consider my > > >> hardware > > >> broken. Strange enough all freezes seemed to happen while moving the > > >> mouse > > >> though, which kept the hope alive it was something software-related. > > >> > > >> Curious to see if my daily freeze will now be a thing of the past now > > >> that I > > >> changed the driver. Though I am on a 2nd gen 915 device, while all the > > >> modesettings driver talk I came across on a quick search seemed to be > > >> only > > >> about gen4 and later? No issues seen for one hour so far, hope grows > > >> > > >> :) > > >> : > > >> > The switch to the modesetting driver seems > > >> > to have fixed those issues. It took me some time to find out how to > > >> > enable > > >> > the modesetting driver. To save others the time here's how to do it: > > >> > Write > > >> > #===== > > >> > Section "Device" > > >> > > > >> > Identifier "Intel Graphics" > > >> > Driver "modesetting" > > >> > > > >> > EndSection > > >> > #===== > > >> > to a file in /etc/X11/xorg.conf.d/, e.g. 50-device.conf. Make sure > > >> > that > > >> > this is the only (or at least the first) "Device" section in any of > > >> > the > > >> > files in /etc/X11/xorg.conf.d/. > > >> > > >> Another approach seems to be to uninstall xf86-video-intel, that way > > >> the > > >> seemingly hardcoded driver-auto-match logic will skip forward to the > > >> modesetting driver: > > >> > > >> [ 12.125] (==) Matched intel as autoconfigured driver 0 > > >> [ 12.125] (==) Matched intel as autoconfigured driver 1 > > >> [ 12.125] (==) Matched modesetting as autoconfigured driver 2 > > >> [ 12.125] (==) Matched fbdev as autoconfigured driver 3 > > >> [ 12.125] (==) Matched vesa as autoconfigured driver 4 > > >> [ 12.125] (==) Assigned the driver to the xf86ConfigLayout > > >> [ 12.125] (II) LoadModule: "intel" > > >> [ 12.127] (WW) Warning, couldn't open module intel > > >> [ 12.127] (II) UnloadModule: "intel" > > >> [ 12.127] (II) Unloading intel > > >> [ 12.127] (EE) Failed to load module "intel" (module does not > > >> exist, 0) > > >> [ 12.127] (II) LoadModule: "modesetting" > > >> [ 12.127] (II) Loading > > >> /usr/lib64/xorg/modules/drivers/modesetting_drv.so > > > > > > I've also recently come across this. According to [1] the performance > > > is > > > supposedly much worse. Is this still true for more recent mesa/kernel > > > versions? > > > > You quoted Phoronix. I hope you don't expect Phoronix to be able to get > > proper measurements. That's something Phoronix still hasn't succeeded > > after all those years. Just for fun I clicked that link and the first > > graph shows a benchmark showing a game one running at 22.15, the other > > at 22.13 fps. This difference is kernel sneezing. So much to that. But > > the real issue is that a game running at 22 fps is unplayable. It has > > nothing to do in the benchmark, the setup is broken. This has been the > > issue as long as I followed Phoronix benchmarking. From an academic > > point of view - which you understand as much as I do - it's just all > > extremely horrible. > > > > Don't take any numbers serious. Michael doesn't understand how to do > > benchmarking. He just runs his tools. He doesn't think about what a > > benchmark should show, what he wants to show. And he doesn't interpret > > the numbers. He just gives numbers. Do they matter? Who knows. You > > derived from his numbers that the "performance is much worse". Is that > > the case? I don't know because I don't see this in the benchmark. I just > > see numbers. We would have to ask someone understanding the system > > whether it makes sense. I assume there are not many people who might be > > able to answer the question. Maybe the authors of GtkPerf, maybe Keith > > Packard as the author of glamor, but certainly not Michael from > > Phoronix. > > > > Hadn't done a Phoronix benchmarking rant for years ;-) Sad that it still > > is needed. > > > > For reference I point to a blog post from 2012 where I discuss Phoronix > > benchmarking in detail: > > http://blog.martin-graesslin.com/blog/2012/09/why-i-dont-like-game-renderi > > ng -performance-benchmarks/ > > > > Everything written there still fully applies to the benchmark in > > question > > Thanks for the rant :) I rarely look at graphic related Phoronix stuff since > I don't know the tools and what they measure. For some I/O and CPU stuff, > the tools are useful and thus the numbers reported are, too. > > So since the tools used here are apparently useless, could you or someone > else please answer the actual question: Is there any perceived performance > difference between modesetting driver and intel driver? I assume it isn't > from the way you respond. Just wanted to make sure.
Well, I tried it out myself now that tosky said it works for him. Indeed, it does for me too - and some glaring bugs are resolved on top! Most notably I'm finally able to launch secondary X sessions, nice :) Thanks everyone for recommending this. I bet more people have this old driver installed out of habit (like I did), without a clear understanding of what they are doing. Cheers -- Milian Wolff m...@milianw.de http://milianw.de
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
