Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 41

Thread: Composite Bypass Support Sharply Bumps XMir's Performance

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    13,396

    Default Composite Bypass Support Sharply Bumps XMir's Performance

    Phoronix: Composite Bypass Support Sharply Bumps XMir's Performance

    Composition bypass support finally landed this morning into the mainline Mir code-base ahead of the Ubuntu 13.10 feature-freeze. With the feature being merged and packages already being pushed into the 13.10 archive, benchmarks at Phoronix have already been conducted. The benchmarks to share this afternoon are of the Mir/XMir packages from yesterday against the Mir packages today with composite bypass support. Lastly, there are benchmarks of a pure X.Org Server running on the same hardware to look at the performance impact and current (reduced) overhead of Mir.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=19077

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    133

    Default

    In before "CANONICAL IS THE DEVIL!!!11!" comments.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    1,287

    Default

    Good news for XMir users
    As expected, it's still somewhat slower than pure X.org, but better is better.
    I'll test it later on my testbox and give my opinion.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    1,190

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mrugiero View Post
    Good news for XMir users
    As expected, it's still somewhat slower than pure X.org, but better is better.
    I'll test it later on my testbox and give my opinion.
    IIRC, the devs have said XWayland shouldn't be slower, and CAN be a bit faster.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    715

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by liam View Post
    IIRC, the devs have said XWayland shouldn't be slower, and CAN be a bit faster.
    This Xmir Thing is just Xorg the real Xwayland has not been developed that we know of

    Nice test Xmir has taken up to a 40% hit on some games and it jump's all over the place on most games this is a real Shame for Ubuntu users Xorg>Xmir

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    1,287

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by liam View Post
    IIRC, the devs have said XWayland shouldn't be slower, and CAN be a bit faster.
    That's for apps, not for DEs. For DEs there can only be overhead, because you are actually using almost all of the features of X.org (particularly, compositing, that can be completely bypassed for apps, since they are perceived as fullscreen for the nested X server). For apps, you can skip a lot of work that is actually done in your real display solution and which handling by X is inefficient.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    31

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LinuxGamer View Post
    This Xmir Thing is just Xorg the real Xwayland has not been developed that we know of

    Nice test Xmir has taken up to a 40% hit on some games and it jump's all over the place on most games this is a real Shame for Ubuntu users Xorg>Xmir
    Actually Xmir is based mostly on code taken from Xwayland and there have been suggestions that large chunks of the code would be shared between the two if it weren't for Ubuntu's NIH syndrome.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    715

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jonimus View Post
    Actually Xmir is based mostly on code taken from Xwayland and there have been suggestions that large chunks of the code would be shared between the two if it weren't for Ubuntu's NIH syndrome.
    yes i know all about the shitty Xwayland thats really Xorg 1.12 thats a waiting patches

    Quote Originally Posted by mrugiero View Post
    That's for apps, not for DEs. For DEs there can only be overhead, because you are actually using almost all of the features of X.org (particularly, compositing, that can be completely bypassed for apps, since they are perceived as fullscreen for the nested X server). For apps, you can skip a lot of work that is actually done in your real display solution and which handling by X is inefficient.
    Xwayland was not made to run DE's and Xwayland atm is shit i don't even know why the Ubuntu developers was thinking this this would be a good idea to fork it but thats Canonical for you

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    1,287

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LinuxGamer View Post
    Xwayland was not made to run DE's and Xwayland atm is shit i don't even know why the Ubuntu developers was thinking this this would be a good idea to fork it but thats Canonical for you
    I'm aware, LG, I just addressed the claim.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    715

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mrugiero View Post
    I'm aware, LG, I just addressed the claim.
    you know the real Xwayland once it's developed will run multiple Xwayland servers on Wayland this will remove the overhead

Posting Permissions

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