On Sat, 31 Jan 2009 21:41:20 +0100 drago01 <drag...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 31, 2009 at 3:30 AM, John Tapsell <johnf...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > 2009/1/31 Bryce Harrington <br...@canonical.com>: > >> On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 01:29:49PM -0800, Eric Anholt wrote: > >>> > $ glxgears > >>> > Failed to initialize TTM buffer manager. Falling back to > >>> > classic. 300 frames in 5.0 seconds = 59.884 FPS > >>> > 299 frames in 5.0 seconds = 59.621 FPS > >>> > 300 frames in 5.0 seconds = 59.818 FPS > >>> > >>> glxgears is not a benchmark. > >>> > >>> We sync to vblank because running glxgears at 1000fps is dumb. > >> > >> I am going to go out on a limb and guess we're going to see a > >> crapload of reports of "performance regression" due to reduced > >> glxgears frame rates. > > > > What was the purpose in this change? I have never heard a user > > complain that glxgears is running too fast, and that they want it to > > vsync. What's the use case of this change exactly? > > vsync has nothing to do with "glxgears is too fast", but it avoids > tearing in real apps. > _______________________________________________ > xorg mailing list > xorg@lists.freedesktop.org > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg you can always put something like: <driconf> <device screen="0" driver="i965"> <application name="all"> <option name="vblank_mode" value="3" /> </application> <application name="glxgears" executable="glxgears"> <option name="vblank_mode" value="0" /> </application> </device> </driconf> in your $HOME/.drirc _______________________________________________ xorg mailing list xorg@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg