From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Eaffx-0007OX-Hr for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 11 Nov 2005 15:39:09 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Eaffw-0007OL-23 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 11 Nov 2005 15:39:09 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Eaffv-0007OI-UR for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 11 Nov 2005 15:39:07 -0500 Received: from [70.112.81.91] (helo=codemonkey.ws) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_3DES_EDE_CBC_SHA:24) (Exim 4.34) id 1Eaffw-0000kA-04 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 11 Nov 2005 15:39:08 -0500 Message-ID: <43750165.4060906@codemonkey.ws> Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 14:39:01 -0600 From: Anthony Liguori MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] GTK GUI for QEmu References: <43727329.8090407@codemonkey.ws> <4373D8A1.5040203@gmx.de> <20051111034526.GA14016@jbrown.mylinuxbox.org> <4374C337.7010002@gmx.de> <4374E910.8080707@codemonkey.ws> <20051111201137.GA24139@jbrown.mylinuxbox.org> In-Reply-To: <20051111201137.GA24139@jbrown.mylinuxbox.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: "Jim C. Brown" Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org Jim C. Brown wrote: >On Fri, Nov 11, 2005 at 12:55:12PM -0600, Anthony Liguori wrote: > > >>Probably. I was hoping to punt on the issue of Win32 and instead rely >>on a native Win32 GUI. I'm not sure GTK on Win32 is going to be that >>great from a performance perspective. >> >> >> > >I haven't tried to benchmark that case. The bigger issue with GTK on W32 was >the need for a 3rd party library (too large, too hard to install, etc etc). > > There's a significant performance difference between using XShmImage's and client-side images. Obviously, XShmImage's are only available on X11. There are better ways to do it on Windows. >I wouldn't rely on the hope of a native W32 gui showing up anytime soon though. >Yours is the third attempt to bring a native GTK gui to qemu - AFAIK we have >yet to see the first attempt for a W32 gui. > > I have no problem writing a Win32 GUI if it's needed to get a good GTK GUI. This is the primary reason I didn't attempt to handle VM creation in the GUI. Better to start at something simple and improve incrementally. >>FWIW, I'm going to benchmark the my latest optimizations for fullscreen >>mode and post the results later today. If scaling can be done with >>little performance impact, I think it's clearly the right thing to do. >> >> >> > >I don't necessarily see a problem with adding support for changing the X server >resolution. However, it is probably harder to do right - it is really difficult >to center the viewport on just the window you want and nothing else. I can't >really think of any advantages in making the host handle this. > > Well, I remembered why I didn't like this earlier. If you change the resolution, the autohiding toolbar is going to appear much larger than it should. This is going to be an accessibility nightmare. On a CPU-bound workload, using a very microbenchmark, the overhead of the current scaling is about 10%. That's actually better than I expected. I'm confident it could be brought down to about 5%. Again, this is for a CPU bound workload. If you're using kqemu and you're not at 100% CPU utilization you wouldn't notice the difference. Regards, Anthony Liguori