Re: dri/drm/kms question with regards to minor faults

On 01/11/2021 05:20, Bert Schiettecatte wrote: > Hi John > >> Coincidentally, I've been looking at Panfrost on RK3288 this week as >> well! I'm testing it with a project that has been using the binary blob >> driver for several years and unfortunately Panfrost seems to use ~15% >> more CPU. >>

Re: dri/drm/kms question with regards to minor faults

Hi John > Coincidentally, I've been looking at Panfrost on RK3288 this week as > well! I'm testing it with a project that has been using the binary blob > driver for several years and unfortunately Panfrost seems to use ~15% > more CPU. > Like you, I see a huge number of minor faults

Re: dri/drm/kms question with regards to minor faults

Hi Bert, On Tue, Oct 26, 2021 at 05:18:47PM -0700, Bert Schiettecatte wrote: > I have an application I'm working on where I'm using OpenGLES / EGL > and dri/drm/kms. The main loop of my application looks like the code > below. When running htop, I see that the number of minor faults > (memory)

dri/drm/kms question with regards to minor faults

Hi All, I have an application I'm working on where I'm using OpenGLES / EGL and dri/drm/kms. The main loop of my application looks like the code below. When running htop, I see that the number of minor faults (memory) are increasing over time at a rate of about 500 per second, due to the code

Re: KMS question

2017-04-13 18:20 keltezéssel, Ville Syrjälä írta: On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 11:37:45AM -0400, Ilia Mirkin wrote: On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 11:36 AM, Alex Deucher wrote: On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 11:03 AM, Boszormenyi Zoltan wrote: 2017-04-13 16:05

Re: KMS question

On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 11:37:45AM -0400, Ilia Mirkin wrote: > On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 11:36 AM, Alex Deucher wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 11:03 AM, Boszormenyi Zoltan wrote: > >> 2017-04-13 16:05 keltezéssel, Alex Deucher írta: > >>> > >>> On Thu, Apr

Re: KMS question

2017-04-13 17:36 keltezéssel, Alex Deucher írta: On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 11:03 AM, Boszormenyi Zoltan wrote: 2017-04-13 16:05 keltezéssel, Alex Deucher írta: On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 9:03 AM, Boszormenyi Zoltan wrote: Hi, how can I disable the behaviour in

Re: KMS question

On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 11:36 AM, Alex Deucher wrote: > On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 11:03 AM, Boszormenyi Zoltan wrote: >> 2017-04-13 16:05 keltezéssel, Alex Deucher írta: >>> >>> On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 9:03 AM, Boszormenyi Zoltan wrote:

Re: KMS question

On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 11:03 AM, Boszormenyi Zoltan wrote: > 2017-04-13 16:05 keltezéssel, Alex Deucher írta: >> >> On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 9:03 AM, Boszormenyi Zoltan wrote: >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> how can I disable the behaviour in the KMS drivers >>> that enables

Re: KMS question

2017-04-13 16:05 keltezéssel, Alex Deucher írta: On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 9:03 AM, Boszormenyi Zoltan wrote: Hi, how can I disable the behaviour in the KMS drivers that enables all outputs at once? It is very annoying that on a POS machine with an 1024x768 LVDS and a 800x480

Re: KMS question

On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 9:03 AM, Boszormenyi Zoltan wrote: > Hi, > > how can I disable the behaviour in the KMS drivers > that enables all outputs at once? > > It is very annoying that on a POS machine with an > 1024x768 LVDS and a 800x480 secondary monitor (both built-in) > the

KMS question

Hi, how can I disable the behaviour in the KMS drivers that enables all outputs at once? It is very annoying that on a POS machine with an 1024x768 LVDS and a 800x480 secondary monitor (both built-in) the KMS driver wakes up both. Then the framebuffer console and plymouth use both screens,