I've been spending some time with the code today, and the problem seems related and proportional to the "cycles" option.
Running braid from the command line: $ ./braid [the default is 100 cycles] braid: warning: only 4% idle over the last 10 secs (at 41.5 FPS) braid: warning: only 6% idle over the last 10 secs (at 61.3 FPS) braid: warning: blocked event processing for 22.1 secs! braid: warning: only 2% idle over the last 32 secs (at 18.5 FPS) $ ./braid -cycles 1000 braid: warning: only 4% idle over the last 10 secs (at 35.4 FPS) braid: warning: only 3% idle over the last 10 secs (at 27.9 FPS) braid: warning: only 2% idle over the last 10 secs (at 23.0 FPS) braid: warning: only 3% idle over the last 10 secs (at 30.0 FPS) braid: warning: blocked event processing for 97.9 secs! braid: warning: only 0% idle over the last 108 secs (at 1.0 FPS) But ... $ ./braid -cycles 10 -- about 50% CPU $ ./braid -cycles 1 -- about 25% CPU The only thing that cycles appears to impact is how often draw_braid calls braid-erase() and init_braid, and I haven't had time to figure out why doing that more often results in lower CPU usage. Nor have I figured out why $ nice -n 15 ./helios $ nice -n 15 ./braid -delay 10000 -cycles 2 exhibit totally different behavior, with the former (and every other screensaver) showing CPU consumption in nice, and the latter not. -- braid screensaver crashes system with compiz activated https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/101943 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
