From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Witold Filipczyk Subject: Re: Why aty128fb is so slow? Date: Sun, 9 Mar 2003 05:43:17 +0000 Sender: linux-fbdev-devel-admin@lists.sourceforge.net Message-ID: <20030309054317.GA2456@pecet.fixsoftware.pl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Return-path: Received: from [217.98.241.107] (helo=pecet.fixsoftware.pl) by sc8-sf-list1.sourceforge.net with esmtp (Exim 3.31-VA-mm2 #1 (Debian)) id 18rtaq-0000KV-00 for ; Sat, 08 Mar 2003 21:43:28 -0800 Content-Disposition: inline Errors-To: linux-fbdev-devel-admin@lists.sourceforge.net List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: linux-fbdev-devel@lists.sourceforge.net On Fri, Mar 07, 2003 at 10:52:28PM +0000, James Simmons wrote: > > > Hello, > > Could anybody explain why aty128fb is so slow? > > I'm using kernel-2.4.20. > > > > 01:00.0 VGA compatible controller: ATI Technologies Inc Rage 128 Pro TF (prog-if 00 [VGA]) > > Subsystem: ATI Technologies Inc Rage 128 Pro TF > > Control: I/O+ Mem+ BusMaster+ SpecCycle- MemWINV- VGASnoop- ParErr- Stepping+ SERR- FastB2B- > > Status: Cap+ 66Mhz+ UDF- FastB2B+ ParErr- DEVSEL=medium >TAbort- SERR- > Latency: 32 (2000ns min), cache line size 08 > > Interrupt: pin A routed to IRQ 11 > > Region 0: Memory at e0000000 (32-bit, prefetchable) [size=64M] > > Region 1: I/O ports at c000 [size=256] > > Region 2: Memory at e7000000 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=16K] > > Expansion ROM at [disabled] [size=128K] > > Capabilities: [50] AGP version 2.0 > > Status: RQ=31 SBA+ 64bit- FW- Rate=x1,x2 > > Command: RQ=0 SBA+ AGP- 64bit- FW- Rate= > > Capabilities: [5c] Power Management version 2 > > Flags: PMEClk- DSI- D1+ D2- AuxCurrent=0mA PME(D0-,D1-,D2-,D3hot-,D3cold-) > > Status: D0 PME-Enable- DSel=0 DScale=0 PME- > > > > > > Computer has Athlon 1.8+ processor on K7VTA3 motherboard. > > > > In directory with 5000 files ls on console takes more than 6 seconds. > > In xterm or rxvt ls takes only 0.6 s. > > Because the driver is completely unaccelerated. Everything is drawn pixel > by pixel :-( 2.5.X is much faster :-) OK. I'll try it. -- Witold Filipczyk ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Etnus, makers of TotalView, The debugger for complex code. Debugging C/C++ programs can leave you feeling lost and disoriented. TotalView can help you find your way. Available on major UNIX and Linux platforms. Try it free. www.etnus.com