Re: Framerate on iR, Part II...
Angus Dorbie (dorbie++at++multipass.engr.sgi.com)
Wed, 10 Sep 1997 17:32:22 -0700
On Sep 10, 1:37pm, Jan Barglowski wrote:
> Subject: Framerate on iR, Part II...
> Thanks to all who've replied, and sorry I haven't summarized sooner!
>
> I still have the ~2 second "glitch", and here's what I've done so far:
>
> - Stopped displaying my xclock (thanks Angus)
>
> - Added the NOINTR directive in my irix.sm (thanks Dr. Colin) as shown
> in the FAQ. I now have protected processors 9, 10, and 11 from
> broadcast interrupts and lock them in my app.
>
> - I run a "desktop" with three "desks", some with nice picture backgrounds.
> Haven't had the chance to disable this, but the desk I run the app on
> has no background defined. Also, the framebuffer is 2560x1024 across
> 2 monitors so I can debug if necessary. (printf's off when testing
> framerate, however). Haven't compare it to a 1280x1024 framebuffer
> yet.
>
> Now I haven't had a lot of time to test various setups, but here's a
> snapshot of "top" when the machine's idle:
> ---
> IRIX64 cyclops 6.2 03131016 IP25 Load[0.24,0.33,0.54] 13:22:22 106 procs
> user pid pgrp %cpu proc pri size rss time command
> root 21 0 4.29 * +39 0 0 5:30 sockd
> jan 1559 1559 0.64 2 61 110 69 0:00 top
> root 3 0 0.12 * +39 0 0 0:08 bdflush
> root 370 0 0.10 * 39 89 47 0:03 sysctlrd
> root 807 0 0.06 * 60 120 70 0:03 mediad
> root 18 0 0.04 * +39 0 0 0:02 rtnetd
> root 210 210 0.04 * 60 135 88 0:00 rpcbind
> root 213 0 0.03 * 60 86 47 0:00 ypbind
> root 22 0 0.03 * +39 0 0 0:00 tpisockd
> root 885 885 0.02 * 60 1024 715 9:19 Xsgi
> jan 1268 1266 0.01 * 60 252 143 0:00 xterm
> root 103 0 0.01 * 60 90 48 0:00 syslogd
> root 233 0 0.00 * 61 0 0 0:00 nfsd
> root 232 0 0.00 * 61 0 0 0:00 nfsd
> root 234 0 0.00 * 61 0 0 0:00 nfsd
> root 224 0 0.00 * 61 0 0 0:00 nfsd
> ---
>
> Most curious is this sockd, which seems to be running with a rather
> high priority and takes up quite of bit of CPU time, too. I got a
> little info on sockd, which is a firewall proxy daemon? The NFS
> mounts are few and checked to be inactive during testing. Maybe
> bdflush?
>
> I do run an intersect process, but the stats show "0" time spent
> (and I've disabled the intersect and same prob stays)
>
> Once again, iR, 12CPU, 2-64Mb RM6, 2Gb RAM, IRIX 6.2, Performer 2.1
>
> OK, Round 2 begin!
>
Try making sure CPU 0 isn't too busy, I think there are some issues
with the vertical retrace interrupt if you have a really heavy load
on this processor.
Cheers,Angus.
=======================================================================
List Archives, FAQ, FTP: http://www.sgi.com/Technology/Performer/
Submissions: info-performer++at++sgi.com
Admin. requests: info-performer-request++at++sgi.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b2
on Mon Aug 10 1998 - 17:55:54 PDT