Date: Fri, 9 Sep 2011 18:46:53 +0000 From: Alexander Best <arundel@freebsd.org> To: Dieter BSD <dieterbsd@engineer.com> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: excessive use of gettimeofday(2) and other syscalls Message-ID: <20110909184653.GA64971@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <20110909162537.183770@gmx.com> References: <20110909162537.183770@gmx.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri Sep 9 11, Dieter BSD wrote: > >> Firefox 5 and 6 has more gettimeofday call than 20000 per second on my > >> amd64-8.2-stable box. > > > i don't see why chromium needs > > to call gettimeofday(2) or any library function that triggers it more > > than 3000 times a second. > > What the <BLEEP> are web browsers doing that they "need" the clock > so often? > > I suspect the answer is the same as why firefox uses significant amounts > of CPU when it should be idle, why it uses memory without bound > (I actually had to add ulimit to my shell's rc file :-( ), and > so on. > > Using "links -g", > "ktrace -di -tc -p6951; sleep 1; ktrace -C; kdump|wc -l" > gives a typical count of 300-400, highest count seen: 1454. well that measurement is probably unfair. my measurements included all opened tabs (~ 15), running plugins and extensions. if i disable all of those extra stuff and use only a single tab, chromium produces less syscalls than links: 270 cheers. alex > > What we need, is a sanely written web browser that has the > features we need. Unfortunately the last time I checked, > links and dillo both lacked features needed for online > shopping/banking.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20110909184653.GA64971>