From owner-freebsd-chromium@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Oct 28 21:22:21 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: chromium@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A75A9657 for ; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 21:22:21 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from evanm@google.com) Received: from mail-ve0-x236.google.com (mail-ve0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400c:c01::236]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 59C942F74 for ; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 21:22:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ve0-f182.google.com with SMTP id c14so4034680vea.27 for ; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 14:22:19 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:cc:content-type; bh=39ihvHO52sqWeisVLFZH4cOKZJtUVBWmy5a0dU+HXlk=; b=nE6Slp7HxOEGnc3/BBoLQm0uEMwcE/OQz+7XRLaP2alWjfVHwHkvReHz4CJrCDnR26 BaAMOYFmb24X8SYsxl/O2E8DHBrbgc4VRApP2xPMVyDSAtm/LZioKXGxduUET41NN79p ftwJDDdrbQUxN/3a0+zC1InV099XsWUQ8L25VzWCZ5V046gz/piUukAL9L8EZxbMg5ea L6YZC94ceLButldezBiOf62dPdCTZQfd0gq+A1LWI71ARusQJW5SYd0t6sSyfHKZs7jU myw87aaIwScHjo/ai74Wjk9GikKnEpRpMtexJ9fIhfdERhOtcZGk1oUe8bXZM8vC6Q0k W3dw== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=chromium.org; s=google; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:cc:content-type; bh=39ihvHO52sqWeisVLFZH4cOKZJtUVBWmy5a0dU+HXlk=; b=RIqjxTFmA957kzd0tX1DegX1f0LgdppiIqwFSvq/KaOlGf2N03y632L736KfaxpZw7 cCw3j6E4vg8k+lha/ZXozp0tFe1/Ualr6V2h38DKCoMSP2jgvy45n8YvDDpOH7Tqpfsr rwV1l/z2ZtISL2zTnSRqabysZvi1azix3y1YQ= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=39ihvHO52sqWeisVLFZH4cOKZJtUVBWmy5a0dU+HXlk=; b=OGonZaSLVZX/naUehKfVM8cs3CFrvJDmBCmmFNva+JySpmPdRDvHiKxdPEB9LB8QhY xl7N5/nOvspxd+le5oW3ohoEgBtvXqXe0bRxBzmqebdJ41UxoJg3zr0eESzAagUu+PT1 +xD3TXoiWx+K06E/l2XmZHCkAREgw1+bc8mx9K02Ndh5xw1FGnH40CQAkvXSGADiKm43 2buoYKcJt9aBw/0RYciasqY6SuKFgc5kX7VdnBwLPkXGqsH9J9tIt+DIyHj4QCHvkF7k 5IX7Dl1TjLZ0ADPrJLqnwQKbped54xS05MRU8vZLooFW3FuNlw7kM0Ill2ZuW3BB/wxn TH+A== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQncJxs2wJhSUchDkunrqdg2YzVNWbAX/2k+F4chjUWPlMwVy9gmchLGT6YS/9OWsjpdSKxatHXNQ3O6Qj62qxUbbvWSTuLV7s+ZnEyFLCojrN+egLlGUqj0ziKA6jJI5+1ABwuFNxzaW+bNJBSULgRvJ7iaY5Ac1RO6Kt5Bs+bod1zkpCOpm2a9h8Aiaqt7whdRiUIQ MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.221.51.206 with SMTP id vj14mr14691377vcb.17.1382995339588; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 14:22:19 -0700 (PDT) Sender: evanm@google.com Received: by 10.52.230.106 with HTTP; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 14:22:19 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <526C3BEF.1020409@rawbw.com> References: <5265ED2F.7030009@rawbw.com> <526C3BEF.1020409@rawbw.com> Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 14:22:19 -0700 X-Google-Sender-Auth: BXEwhmTTOXSQyJ2d0-Z91gn_JO8 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Why Google street view scrolls not very smoothly in Chrome? From: Evan Martin To: Yuri Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.14 Cc: chromium@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-chromium@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: FreeBSD-specific Chromium issues List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 21:22:21 -0000 On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 3:02 PM, Yuri wrote: > On 10/22/2013 09:21, Evan Martin wrote: > >> One thing to try is to go to Chrome's settings, search for "hardware", >> and uncheck "use hardware acceleration when available". >> That uses a different code path (X CopyRects instead of OpenGL calls) >> that might be faster. As for *why* it's different, blame any of bugs in >> the port, bugs in the drivers, X's design, or anything else of your >> choosing. :) >> > > "use hardware acceleration when available" is set, but the problem occurs > nevertheless. > You misread. I suggested *un*checking "use hardware acceleration". (Chrome's hardware acceleration support works better on platforms with better GL drivers; in my experience it makes things worse on Linux, at least.) However, this isn't relevant because of the below: I did some investigation. The same flash street-view object is instantiated > in exactly the same way in both chrome and firefox. (DOM branch > corresponding to flash is identical in both browsers). But there is still > the difference in behavior as I explained in my OP. > > On 4-core machine in firefox, flash itself pops up in top(1). 4 > npviewer.bin processes go up to ~40% CPU each, and Xorg is also at 40%. > > In chrome Xorg goes to 100% CPU, and this "stickiness" occurs. > > From the above I conclude that some plugin callbacks into the browser > either behave differently, or are invoked differently in chrome. > > Is there any way to log the communication with instantiated plugin in > chrome? > > One other difference in behavior is that in chrome right mouse click > doesn't cause the standard flash menu (with Global Settings amd About > items) to appear. Ah, you're using nspluginwrapper. Unfortunately, nspluginwrapper just doesn't work very well with Chrome. nspluginwrapper is actually unmaintained, and in working on Chrome for Linux we ran into so many problems with it that one of the Chrome developers took over maintainership in an attempt to fix some bugs! But in practice I don't think it'll ever work well. http://nspluginwrapper.org/ => last release was June 2011.