Re: Measuring latency on my Apple G3
On Mon, 2003-07-21 at 13:46, Ismael Valladolid Torres wrote:
> Michel Dänzer escribio el 21/07/03 13:09:
> > First of all, you mentioned in another post that you use x11perf to
> > create X11 stress. Are there also problems with real world apps?
>
> "Real world" apps work properly (except for the Gnome theme manager
> which displays garbage).
Probably a GTK bug, not related to this thread. The point is real world
as opposed to synthetic throughput benchmarks like x11perf.
> I only find video performance using Linux a lot lower than using
> any of the Mac OS's.
Which isn't very surprising, as they can use parts of the graphics chip
that we don't have specs for, for one.
> > Also keep in mind that neither the vanilla 2.4 kernel nor the X server
> > were designed for low latency. Have you tried the low latency and/or
> > O(1) scheduler kernel patches, and not running the X server with
> > negative nice values if you are?
>
> Both of those patches (A. Morton and R. Love's ones) were applied to my
> kernel.
Beware that at least the low latency patch needs fiddling with
arch/ppc/config.in to actually be enabled (check with grep LOLAT
.config), and that the preempt patch (which I assume you mean by R.
Love's) actually made things worse for me when I tried it on PPC a while
ago. This may have been fixed in the meantime though.
> I don't know about running the X server with different nice values,
sudo dpkg-reconfigure xserver-common
> which advantage would I get?
The X server might take less CPU away from other processes. Or maybe the
problem is the other way around. :) YMMV.
--
Earthling Michel Dänzer \ Debian (powerpc), XFree86 and DRI developer
Software libre enthusiast \ http://svcs.affero.net/rm.php?r=daenzer
Reply to: