[sugar] rendering test

[Riccardo Lucchese]

On Mon, 2008-09-29 at 09:08 -0600, Jordan Crouse wrote:
> On 28/09/08 18:46 +0200, Bernie Innocenti wrote:
> > Tomeu Vizoso wrote:
> > > Ooops. cc'ing to some other people/list in the hope someone more
> > > knowledgeable than me will comment.
> > 
> > Thanks.  Please Cc me on posts like these to make sure I don't miss them. 
> >   No, it doesn't bother me to receive 0.001% more mail.
> > 
> > I've also Cc'd the Xorg list in case someone can give us more insight.
> > 
> > 
> > > On Sun, Sep 28, 2008 at 12:46 PM, Riccardo Lucchese
> > > <riccardo.lucchese at gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> On Sun, 2008-09-28 at 12:43 +0200, Riccardo Lucchese wrote:
> > >>> * build 703, xorg driver = amd, redraws = 200
> > >>> - pixbuf:
> > >>>   98.63s
> > >>>   96.96s
> > >>>   96.58s
> > >>>   97.14s
> > >>>   99.21s
> > >>>
> > >>> * build 703, xorg driver = fbdev, redraws = 200
> > >>> - pixbuf:
> > >>>   55.81s
> > >>>   55.40s
> > >>>   55.22s
> > >>>   55.50s
> > >>>   55.63s
> > >>>
> > >>> * build 2489, xorg driver = amd, redraws = 200
> > >>> - pixbuf:
> > >>>   84.21s
> > >>>   84.81s
> > >>>   81.94s
> > >>>   81.79s
> > >>>   85.29s
> > >>>
> > >>> * build 2489, xorg driver = fbdev, redraws = 200
> > >>> - pixbuf:
> > >>>   62.83s
> > >>>   62.81s
> > >>>   62.81s
> > >>>   62.66s
> > >>>   63.14s
> > >>>
> > >>> - joyride regressed sensibly at rendering with cairo since 703
> > >>> - rendering pixbufs is extremely slow on the xo
> > >>> - server side surfaces are awesome ;)
> > >>>
> > >> and btw why is fbdev faster than the geode driver at rendering pixbufs ?
> > 
> > Was fbdev running with EXA or XAA?  (does fbdev even support EXA?)
> > 
> > My performance tests with X 1.3 and 1.4 had shown that turning on EXA 
> > makes many operations slower.  It's hard to tell why, but it might have to 
> > do with loosing XShmPut() (MIT shared memory), excessive migration of 
> > pixmaps to the framebuffer, and so on.  X 1.5 was supposed to have a much 
> > better EXA, at least judging from the stream of patches landed on the tree.
> 
> Indeed - migration is probably what is hurting us the most here.   We 
> would probably have to do a more in-depth analysis of what is actually
> happening in the engine, but the general rule of thumb is that it is very
> very very very very bad to read from the video memory. 
> 

Timings with X 1.5 (I picked up the most recent package I could find on
koji for fc9) don't change at all.

riccardo