From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261355AbULAK0h (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Dec 2004 05:26:37 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261359AbULAK0h (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Dec 2004 05:26:37 -0500 Received: from canuck.infradead.org ([205.233.218.70]:11022 "EHLO canuck.infradead.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261355AbULAK0R (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Dec 2004 05:26:17 -0500 Subject: Re: Kernel 2.6 with X (xorg) 4.4 (eats more CPU power) From: Arjan van de Ven To: Joe Hsu Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <1101896505.2161.45.camel@joe> References: <1101896505.2161.45.camel@joe> Content-Type: text/plain Message-Id: <1101896767.2640.19.camel@laptop.fenrus.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.6 (1.4.6-2.dwmw2.1) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 11:26:07 +0100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 3.7 (+++) X-Spam-Report: SpamAssassin version 2.63 on canuck.infradead.org summary: Content analysis details: (3.7 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 1.1 RCVD_IN_DSBL RBL: Received via a relay in list.dsbl.org [] 2.5 RCVD_IN_DYNABLOCK RBL: Sent directly from dynamic IP address [80.57.133.107 listed in dnsbl.sorbs.net] 0.1 RCVD_IN_SORBS RBL: SORBS: sender is listed in SORBS [80.57.133.107 listed in dnsbl.sorbs.net] X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by canuck.infradead.org See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 2004-12-01 at 18:21 +0800, Joe Hsu wrote: > And I found something interisting happened. In pentium 4 > 3.0G machine and linux kernel 2.6, X and my program total > consumes 5% of cpu resource. > > But in pentium 4 2.xG or below, it would consume 10% or > more of CPU resource. (If you try this with XFree86 4.2 and > pentium 1.xG machine, it would consume 30% or more of cpu > resource at a peak.) > > In contrast, I've tried Kernel 2.4 with same X, same > program, and same machine. It consumes almost zero of CPU > resource( no matter it runs on a P4 1.xG or P4 3.0G and no > matter it runs on 4.4 or 4.2 X-server). > > Same phenomenon happened when I ran 4 mpeg4 playback > programs (each 320x240, 30 frames per second, no scaling). > It seems that these programs and X consume almost zero of > CPU power when the KERNEL HZ is 100. (I've > tried Robert Love's variable HZ patch to kernel 2.4 and > change HZ to 1000........Same phenomenon as 2.6) > > Could any one explain why??? Thanks. > (I wish to be personally CC'ed the answers/comments posted > to the list in response to your posting 'cause I do not > subscribe to this mailing list.) > > - > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ --