View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
cyberjun Apprentice
Joined: 06 Nov 2005 Posts: 293
|
Posted: Wed Apr 28, 2010 11:37 am Post subject: slow virtual consoles with KMS |
|
|
Hi,
I am running gentoo-sources-2.6.33-r1 on a dell D510 laptop with intel graphics. I have enabled KMS and thus framebuffer. Everything is working fine except the VCs. The switch from X to VC or vice versa is fast (as promised by KMS). However the VCs are slow in rendering text.
From gnome-terminal:
Quote: | localhost ~$ time ls -lrt /usr/bin
.......
<snip snip>
.......
real 0m0.839s
user 0m0.034s
sys 0m0.042s
From VC:
localhost ~$ time ls -lrt /usr/bin
.......
<snip snip>
.......
real 0m2.074s
user 0m0.027s
sys 0m1.985s
|
I am running xf86-video-intel-2.10.0-r1 and xorg-server-1.7.6. Is KMS framebuffer inherently slower than gnome-terminal's rendering?
--cyberjun |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Ant P. Watchman
Joined: 18 Apr 2009 Posts: 6920
|
Posted: Wed Apr 28, 2010 5:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Unless someone decides to push X's 2D accel code into the kernel, it's always going to be slower. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
dmpogo Advocate
Joined: 02 Sep 2004 Posts: 3468 Location: Canada
|
Posted: Wed Apr 28, 2010 5:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It is not KMS per se. I use vesafb with high-rez mode and no KMS, and my numbers are almost identical to yours. Lack of acceleration shows. (I think I remember intelfb had some 2D acceleration, but it got rusted away) |
|
Back to top |
|
|
M Guru
Joined: 12 Dec 2006 Posts: 432
|
Posted: Wed Apr 28, 2010 7:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
vesafb is not accelerated, fb drivers for specific cards are, but it seems like those are not touched for years. But I tried nouveau many times and lately with kms, I didn't time it but fb seems much much faster then vesafb and mplayer works really good, I think kms should be accelerated. My guess is that something is wrong with intel drivers.
I remember how good it was when I used matrox video card with fb driver and kernel driver for mplayer (one of main devs had matrox card ) , I think that analog tv with mplayer in framebuffer had better quality compared to X. I now have old t20 with savage card and it surprises me how fast it is when switching VC, I also saw huge difference between savagefb and vesafb (savagefb is faster but not so usable). |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Rexilion Veteran
Joined: 17 Mar 2009 Posts: 1044
|
Posted: Thu Apr 29, 2010 9:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
The threadstarter has an accelerated framebuffer, I'm sure of that. I mean, if you used a standard VGA terminal it could have taken minutes for that action to complete. I think that userspace terminals like xterm, gnome-terminal et all also skip large chunks of text: they just display it once and then move over to the next. The VC slides no matter how much you put in it which causes it to take a little longer... |
|
Back to top |
|
|
M Guru
Joined: 12 Dec 2006 Posts: 432
|
Posted: Thu Apr 29, 2010 10:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
Maybe disabling the VGACON_SOFT_SCROLLBACK can help a little bit, this option uses system ram instead of vga ram but slows down console. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Rexilion Veteran
Joined: 17 Mar 2009 Posts: 1044
|
Posted: Thu Apr 29, 2010 10:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
M wrote: | Maybe disabling the VGACON_SOFT_SCROLLBACK can help a little bit, this option uses system ram instead of vga ram but slows down console. |
It slows down the console for more scrollback buffer, it won't speed it up I guess. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|