very slow performance of glxgears (68 fps)

[Ian Romanick]

On Fri, 2009-01-30 at 18:11 -0800, Bryce Harrington wrote:
> 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.
> 
> Mayhaps this could be headed off by changing glxgears output a bit?
> Something like:
> 
>  $ glxgears
>  Failed to initialize TTM buffer manager.  Falling back to classic.
>  300 frames in 5.0 seconds = 100.0% synchronized
>  299 frames in 5.0 seconds = 99.93% synchronized
>  300 frames in 5.0 seconds = 100.0% synchronized

I just committed something similar to the Mesa repository.  If it
detects that vsync is happening, it logs a message to that effect.  The
detection is not 100% reliable, but it's as good as I can get it.

[idr at localhost xdemos]$ glxgears
Mesa: Initializing x86-64 optimizations
Mesa: Mesa 7.5-devel DEBUG build Jan 30 2009 16:45:54
Mesa warning: couldn't open libtxc_dxtn.so, software DXTn
compression/decompression unavailable
Running synchronized to the vertical refresh.  The framerate should be
approximately the same as the montior refresh rate.
295 frames in 5.0 seconds = 58.948 FPS
300 frames in 5.0 seconds = 59.914 FPS

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg/attachments/20090201/ed92d89a/attachment.pgp>