Michel Dänzer <mic...@daenzer.net> writes: > I wrote an eerily similar patch a while ago, but the problem turned out > to be in the GL or kernel driver. Are you sure that's not the case for > you?
I'm seeing a long lag when running benchmarks that don't ever need to synchronize with the hardware. Given that the X server doesn't use SwapBuffers, I'm not sure where else we would expect rate limiting to occur? > Should glamor_block_handler get the same treatment? No, that's used for synchronizing buffers before swapping, not called periodically like the "real" block handler. > One potential issue (at least with glamor_block_handler) is that we can > end up calling glFlush quite often without any preceding drawing > commands. If that causes too much overhead, we may need to start keeping > track of whether we've submitted any OpenGL drawing commands, and > short-circuit (_)glamor_block_handler if we haven't. Yeah, I haven't measured any performance impact of doing it here; benchmarks avoid hitting the block handler. -- -keith
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ xorg-devel@lists.x.org: X.Org development Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel Info: https://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel