Page 2 of 13 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 127

Thread: The Performance Penalty Of Xfce/Xubuntu On XMir

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    563

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MrTheSoulz View Post
    these benchmarks are worth nothing... mir doseny have bypass yet so its point less to benchmark it...
    the final version is gonna fix that untill then all this are useless benchmars to fed wars and get more trafic :P
    Let's see. Xubuntu is testing XMir, a few weeks before feature freeze for this release, so they need feeback on the performance of Xubuntu under XMir, ASAP. And they asked for that. And Michael did just that, as a service, for free.

    Now, what exactly are you complaining about?

    Thanks Michael, keep up the good work, man!
    Last edited by mendieta; 08-06-2013 at 02:28 PM. Reason: typo

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    1,458

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Andrecorreia View Post
    this is in dev yet lol ofc the perfomance is not good as normal X. do the same with wayland, ups wayland not works i forgett
    No one sane would do such a thing with Wayland because it's entirely pointless to run and entire DE on top of a compatibility layer. With Wayland, there's a stable protocol that allows developers to write their own Wayland compositors, which can run Wayland natively, so there's no need for kludgy hacks like running a DE on XMir is. Mir has nothing comparable to offer, it serves no one's purposes except Canonical's, and even Canonical is going to suffer because of this idiocy.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    46

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dee. View Post
    No one sane would do such a thing with Wayland because it's entirely pointless to run and entire DE on top of a compatibility layer. With Wayland, there's a stable protocol that allows developers to write their own Wayland compositors, which can run Wayland natively, so there's no need for kludgy hacks like running a DE on XMir is. Mir has nothing comparable to offer, it serves no one's purposes except Canonical's, and even Canonical is going to suffer because of this idiocy.
    this is not true, theres a good reason to run the DE on mir (for what i understand), drivers! the software layer will be X.org and drivers will be mir (X+Mir=xmir) wich means x.org no longer manages the drivers mir does.
    i might be wrong but this is what i understand about it.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    1,287

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MrTheSoulz View Post
    this is not true, theres a good reason to run the DE on mir (for what i understand), drivers! the software layer will be X.org and drivers will be mir (X+Mir=xmir) wich means x.org no longer manages the drivers mir does.
    i might be wrong but this is what i understand about it.
    So, are there any drivers for Mir out there?

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    46

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mrugiero View Post
    So, are there any drivers for Mir out there?
    intel, ati and nvidia work with the opensource drivers.
    canonical claims they should have the closed source ones before 14.04 untill then when your using closed source you will fallback to pure X, so id you only care about performance you got NOTHING to worry about since you will be running pure X.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    3,173

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MrTheSoulz View Post
    this is not true, theres a good reason to run the DE on mir (for what i understand), drivers! the software layer will be X.org and drivers will be mir (X+Mir=xmir) wich means x.org no longer manages the drivers mir does.
    i might be wrong but this is what i understand about it.
    By running XMir, they still require DDX drivers in order to get 2D acceleration. They are still running the same 3D Mesa drivers. The only difference is that Mir (i think) is handling mode setting now. I'm not even certain about that.

    Oh, and of course the proprietary drivers still only work with X. Which means that Ubuntu has to complicate things and run Mir + XMir sometimes and just X others, and makes a huge mess out of everything.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    1,177

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mrugiero View Post
    So, are there any drivers for Mir out there?
    Mir simply uses Mesa/DRI2 drivers but with a small yet unsupported patch to add a Mir back-end to Mesa.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    149

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by schmidtbag View Post
    Because it's a potential candidate to the successor of X.org.
    Not for me.

    Quote Originally Posted by schmidtbag View Post
    Right now it's a race between wayland and mir, and while mir is younger and less supported by the community, it's catching up really fast.
    Mir is a joke (a bad one).

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    46

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by smitty3268 View Post
    By running XMir, they still require DDX drivers in order to get 2D acceleration. They are still running the same 3D Mesa drivers. The only difference is that Mir (i think) is handling mode setting now. I'm not even certain about that.

    Oh, and of course the proprietary drivers still only work with X. Which means that Ubuntu has to complicate things and run Mir + XMir sometimes and just X others, and makes a huge mess out of everything.
    i dont see what is so complicated.
    when botting ubuntu detects what drivers are you running and loads either mir + xmir or x.org, im i wrong?

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    1,287

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MrTheSoulz View Post
    intel, ati and nvidia work with the opensource drivers.
    canonical claims they should have the closed source ones before 14.04 untill then when your using closed source you will fallback to pure X, so id you only care about performance you got NOTHING to worry about since you will be running pure X.
    Oh, the same drivers you use with X.org. So, where's the point of using XMir, again?
    I use only open source drivers.

    Quote Originally Posted by smitty3268 View Post
    The only difference is that Mir (i think) is handling mode setting now. I'm not even certain about that.
    Isn't that handled by the kernel drivers?

    Quote Originally Posted by Awesomeness View Post
    Mir simply uses Mesa/DRI2 drivers but with a small yet unsupported patch to add a Mir back-end to Mesa.
    Oh, I'm aware.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •