<html> <head> <base href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/"> </head> <body> <div> <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_NEW " title="NEW - intel-virtual-output: bad performance" href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=96820#c3">Comment # 3</a> on <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_NEW " title="NEW - intel-virtual-output: bad performance" href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=96820">bug 96820</a> from <a class="email" href="mailto:chris@chris-wilson.co.uk" title="Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>"> Chris Wilson</a> <pre>(In reply to main.haarp from <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=96820#c2">comment #2</a>) > Created <a href="attachment.cgi?id=124936" name="attach_124936" title="5000 lines of ivo -v log">attachment 124936</a> <a href="attachment.cgi?id=124936&action=edit" title="5000 lines of ivo -v log">[details]</a> > 5000 lines of ivo -v log > > Thanks. > > I've ran ivo with the -v flag while attaching two 2560x1440 monitors over > DP. This produces quite a lot of log, I've attached it. > > However I can't find any hints regarding being rate-limited. What exactly am > I looking for? I actually thought there was more timing info in there, but it's the frequency and duration of the rendering and its synchronisation that's important. > I've also played with virtualgl vs. primus, but did not notice a difference > between the two. ivo uses its own independent method of copying between X > servers, correct? ivo is just using plain X (which iirc virtualgl and primus also do). What I am hoping for is for nvidia to support DRI3/Present as that would give a very simple way to do efficient transfers. Alternatively using glMapBuffer() may fare better (although it should not from a technical standpoint). The first step you may want to try is to stop your desktop wm from marking the whole framebuffer as being damaged on every frame.</pre> </div> <hr> You are receiving this mail because: <ul> <li>You are the QA Contact for the bug.</li> </ul> </body> </html>