From owner-freebsd-multimedia@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Aug 7 15:54:18 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: multimedia@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 465CA1065671 for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2008 15:54:18 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd@optiksecurite.com) Received: from tomts52-srv.bellnexxia.net (tomts52-srv.bellnexxia.net [209.226.175.177]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D32D18FC38 for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2008 15:54:17 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd@optiksecurite.com) Received: from toip38-bus.srvr.bell.ca ([67.69.240.39]) by tomts52-srv.bellnexxia.net (InterMail vM.5.01.06.13 201-253-122-130-113-20050324) with ESMTP id <20080807155417.JOHN1589.tomts52-srv.bellnexxia.net@toip38-bus.srvr.bell.ca>; Thu, 7 Aug 2008 11:54:17 -0400 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ApoEAI2ymkhKD7BS/2dsb2JhbACtBA Received: from mtrlpq02-1242542162.sdsl.bell.ca (HELO [69.69.69.183]) ([74.15.176.82]) by toip38-bus.srvr.bell.ca with ESMTP; 07 Aug 2008 11:54:15 -0400 Message-ID: <489B1A6C.2070001@optiksecurite.com> Date: Thu, 07 Aug 2008 11:53:16 -0400 From: FreeBSD User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.16 (Windows/20080708) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: george+freebsd@m5p.com References: <200807211604.m6LG45j0017384@m5p.com> In-Reply-To: <200807211604.m6LG45j0017384@m5p.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: multimedia@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Degraded X Performance in 7.0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-multimedia@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Multimedia discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 07 Aug 2008 15:54:18 -0000 george+freebsd@m5p.com a écrit : > Yesterday, I wrote: >> On: Fri, 18 Jul 2008 19:28:19 -0400 >> "Ben Kaduk" wrote: >>> On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 1:49 PM, wrote: >>>> Between FreeBSD 6.2 and FreeBSD 7.0, something has happened with >>>> performance. Using a generic 6.2 kernel and the X server which >>>> shipped with it, and mplayer built with the defaults from ports, >>>> I would play a movie from an NFS-mounted disk, with mplayer using >>>> roughly 30% of the CPU time and xorg less than 5%. On the very same >>>> hardware upgraded to a generic 7.0 kernel and the X server which >>>> shipped with it, and mplayer built with the defaults from ports, >>>> playing the same movie from the same NFS-mounted disk, mplayer >>>> still takes roughly 30% of the CPU, but xorg is taking 35-40% of >>>> the CPU! The quality of the playback is noticeably rough. What >>>> should I be looking for? The diff between an old Xorg.0.log and >>>> a new one is pretty massive. I have an ATI Technologies Inc Rage >>>> XL AGP 2X rev 39, Mem @ 0xce000000/24, 0xcfeff000/12, I/O @ 0x8800/8, >>>> BIOS @ 0xcfec0000/17 according to the log. >>>> >>> It sounds like your graphics card isn't doing as much work as it should. >>> Could you post the results of dmesg and your Xorg.0.log somewhere >>> accessible? It would be best if versions before and after the upgrade >>> were available. >>> >>> -Ben Kaduk >>> >> Here's the info: >> >> http://www.m5p.com/~george/freebsd/ >> >> and thanks for your attention! -- George Mitchell > > Now I've fixed the premissions so you can actually read them. Sorry! > -- George Mitchell > Did you finally resolved your problem? If so, I would be interested in some indications. Martin