From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Chris Wilson Subject: Re: X11 performance regressions Date: Wed, 11 May 2011 18:52:06 +0100 Message-ID: References: <4DC6DF5D.2050006@t-online.de> <15db10$kicfca@fmsmga002.fm.intel.com> <4DCAA134.4020705@t-online.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mga01.intel.com (mga01.intel.com [192.55.52.88]) by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D98AB9F103 for ; Wed, 11 May 2011 10:52:10 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4DCAA134.4020705@t-online.de> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: intel-gfx-bounces+gcfxdi-intel-gfx=m.gmane.org@lists.freedesktop.org Errors-To: intel-gfx-bounces+gcfxdi-intel-gfx=m.gmane.org@lists.freedesktop.org To: Knut Petersen , intel-gfx List-Id: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org On Wed, 11 May 2011 16:46:12 +0200, Knut Petersen wrote: > Yes, I made some mistakes during my first measurements. > > Below find better results. They are made on the same machine, > with the same kernel, at the same speed, with the same x11perf > program, absolutely nothing changed. > > I used x11perfcomp -ro and sorted the output, worst results for > the currrent git code first. > > I think the numbers below are quite interesting ... > 1 2 Operation > -------- ------ --------- > 965000.0 0.016 10x10 wide rectangle outline Something is still not quite right here. This should be mostly CPU bound, and even my Atom gets 734k. Can you check that (a) it is CPU bound and (b) the worst offenders according to the system profiler of your choice (e.g. perf)? Thanks for doing this investigation. -Chris -- Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre