From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by yocto-www.yoctoproject.org (Postfix, from userid 118) id 4D9EBE009A0; Mon, 25 Apr 2016 12:44:21 -0700 (PDT) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on yocto-www.yoctoproject.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, FREEMAIL_FROM, HTML_MESSAGE, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-HAM-Report: * 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider * (dbureau[at]gmail.com) * -1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% * [score: 0.0000] * 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message * 0.0 MIME_QP_LONG_LINE RAW: Quoted-printable line longer than 76 chars * -0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's * domain * 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily * valid * -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature * -0.7 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, low * trust * [209.85.220.169 listed in list.dnswl.org] Received: from mail-qk0-f169.google.com (mail-qk0-f169.google.com [209.85.220.169]) by yocto-www.yoctoproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1DEDFE00857 for ; Mon, 25 Apr 2016 12:44:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qk0-f169.google.com with SMTP id r184so66746876qkc.1 for ; Mon, 25 Apr 2016 12:44:17 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=user-agent:date:subject:from:to:message-id:thread-topic :mime-version; bh=fKx7+m2Yhwa2uCvrkbtEwLiwp3obFEosVWfhSJLpWBM=; b=X1ttRvB4hYXap61JTxJ1MbouXMtfw79CvCSCpZl4Rgl/MVgblyiWpxNJ7g8rQ0zefL wv+sjZZN5WYtURkyxdYF24uIJ6FOudDUDp0Be28iSv42cSzmqGIa+gTwM9h+LHyOIY12 YpjobN5/WT7OokzMMc4dbbWnN6Oq42QMmxyd4c1u2qkV02PN7H0fqrsmwRAiqN/iAT3i UfgitjdNbDVjyUp2ApdQVUqm9O3qAo/p0vXb1rldfUeit5tf4/17Y0Parkz1uiqVFmWF 70N5GTj31WX1NEfgA/AvNC3UcjCplHraJdGPZULhiXweUMafGy2hp6ppKoxukBen2PtW dnpg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:user-agent:date:subject:from:to:message-id :thread-topic:mime-version; bh=fKx7+m2Yhwa2uCvrkbtEwLiwp3obFEosVWfhSJLpWBM=; b=G9fzt1WqmrPAKSx5UquUANvAf90ua6d8IEOnkLj7j+QhZYsU+/W0hLQB/PSDWBpebm fmoxCSBbUMj0NWduK0Xx4Ifk5UZl0Zl9j2l++ZMFcR++s3Mosl1vknnlDChL04qwpFdB xi3bSFZYQX2HowNLYinkiibx/iVkzOqCsY5Qz+wrNPD6NAwRs7Z6o8izB+Df84wd87kb jQynG+dYzVo7+PDrSYXPZoKPGlP4O+WVAJAVZrQCkMDLA/RfiAyXX5D4zFEPr5oI0E0C 2ROGR4sibKzGKRLvos/ZLjm+8vrBdxUWJu/n0Y68k1r34wjEM60haTbDtZkRVTUMqHm9 yCZw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOPr4FVlcqjel04q4IwZhp6yUl2nlwjqSO4O42sqPUR4ob0gyUeGPk9VMWC9ehTHlSfxEQ== X-Received: by 10.55.108.7 with SMTP id h7mr19880030qkc.136.1461613456886; Mon, 25 Apr 2016 12:44:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.7.61] ([207.96.182.162]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 195sm7614923qkg.20.2016.04.25.12.44.14 for (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Mon, 25 Apr 2016 12:44:16 -0700 (PDT) User-Agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.3.8.130913 Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2016 15:44:10 -0400 From: Dominique Bureau To: "meta-freescale@yoctoproject.org" Message-ID: Thread-Topic: Weston performance issue on imx6quad Mime-version: 1.0 Subject: Weston performance issue on imx6quad X-BeenThere: meta-freescale@yoctoproject.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: Usage and development list for the meta-fsl-* layers List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2016 19:44:21 -0000 Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="B_3544443855_9915750" --B_3544443855_9915750 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Hi, We're currently upgrading the bsp of our board (based off a SabreSD at 1.2Ghz) from Daisy to Jethro using kernel 3.10.53 and stumbled upon a performance issue within weston with fbdev-backend (or at least that's what it looks like). Running weston-simple-egl easily shows the performance difference between my two setups: * On Daisy (weston 1.6): solid 60 fps * On Jethro (weston 1.8, imx-gpu-viv-5.0.11.p7.4): 35.56 fps I'm using the same parameters on both setups (FB_MULTI_BUFFER=2, --use-gl=1). Setting the FB_MULTI_BUFFER=1 will give a slight performance increase (39.0 fps), but still nowhere near where we were on Daisy. Also, I've tried updating to Weston 1.9, as well as imx-gpu-viv-5.0.11.p8.3, but get the same results. Is there anything obvious I could be missing? Another detail is that the bsp was originally based off the Freescale bsp release, but we have since moved to the community release during our update to Jethro. Thanks! -- Dominique Bureau --B_3544443855_9915750 Content-type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable
Hi,

= We're currently upgrading the bsp of our board (based off a SabreSD at 1.2Gh= z) from Daisy to Jethro using kernel 3.10.53 and stumbled upon a performance= issue within weston with fbdev-backend (or at least that's what it looks li= ke).

Running weston-simple-egl easily shows the per= formance difference between my two setups:
  • On Daisy (weston 1.6= ): solid 60 fps
  • On Jethro (weston 1.8, imx-gpu-viv-5.0.11.p7.4): 35.= 56 fps
I'm using the same parameters on both setups (FB_MULTI_= BUFFER=3D2, --use-gl=3D1). Setting the FB_MULTI_BUFFER=3D1 will give a slight perf= ormance increase (39.0 fps), but still nowhere near where we were on Daisy. = Also, I've tried updating to Weston 1.9, as well as imx-gpu-viv-5.0.11.p8.3,= but get the same results.

Is there anything obviou= s I could be missing?


Another detail= is that the bsp was originally based off the Freescale bsp release, but we = have since moved to the community release during our update to Jethro.
=

Thanks!

--
Dominique = Bureau
--B_3544443855_9915750--