[Bug 80784] [BDW]90% CPU usage at on one of the CPU cores when run Synmark2_v5_3_0_OglDrvCtx

[bugzilla-daemon at freedesktop.org]

https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=80784

--- Comment #11 from Eero Tamminen <eero.t.tamminen at intel.com> ---
Looking at the perf reports...

Processes:

BDW:
 71.73%   417189 synmark2
 18.48%   107495 X
  7.38%    42920 gnome-shell
  1.84%    10673 swapper
  0.24%     1368 rcu_sched
HSW:
 59.63%   494907 synmark2
 27.77%   230493 X
  6.01%    49843 swapper
  5.58%    46285 gnome-shell
  0.60%     4957 rcu_sched

With BDW CPU utilization being 90% and HSW 40%, that means X using less CPU on
HSW too, although its part of perf samples is larger. gnome-shell using
significantly less CPU on HSW although it should be dealing with slightly more
X damage events (with higher FPS) is a bit suspicious.


DSOs:

BDW:
 39.78%   231385 libc-2.17.so
 20.25%   117783 [kernel.kallsyms]
 17.71%   102981 i965_dri.so
  6.55%    38122 Xorg
  4.48%    26043 libpthread-2.17.so
  2.73%    15887 libxcb.so.1.1.0
  1.63%     9476 libX11.so.6.3.0
  1.25%     7299 libglib-2.0.so.0.3600.4
HSW:
 32.29%   268036 libc-2.17.so
 29.15%   241954 [kernel.kallsyms]
 11.84%    98267 Xorg
  8.80%    73022 i965_dri.so
  5.34%    44350 libpthread-2.17.so
  3.55%    29504 libxcb.so.1.1.0
  2.26%    18773 libX11.so.6.3.0
  1.01%     8363 libglib-2.0.so.0.3600.4

It's not just malloc which is used a lot more, the graphics driver does a lot
more work on BDW.

Comparing all the i965 driver functions in the perf data, BDW does much more
work with (anonymous namespace)::builtin_variable_generator::add_uniform() and
hash table handling, whereas HSW driver does most work with
_mesa_make_extension_string()???

One possibility is that one of the profiles wasn't taken from normal running of
the test program, but e.g. from its startup or end.  Mengmeng?

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/intel-gfx-bugs/attachments/20140703/5014196f/attachment.html>