Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2008 08:44:59 -0700 From: John E Hein <jhein@timing.com> To: Peter Jeremy <peterjeremy@optushome.com.au> Cc: freebsd-x11@freebsd.org, d@delphij.net Subject: Re: Xorg vs gettimeofday() and clock_gettime() Message-ID: <18372.13307.731931.284086@gromit.timing.com> In-Reply-To: <20080226100728.GU83599@server.vk2pj.dyndns.org> References: <47C320DB.70004@delphij.net> <18371.11144.568407.26227@gromit.timing.com> <20080226100728.GU83599@server.vk2pj.dyndns.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Peter Jeremy wrote at 21:07 +1100 on Feb 26, 2008: > My guess is pointer acceleration and/or 3-button emulation. Out of > interest, I just ktrace'd my X server for 5 seconds (doing nothing in > particular) and got 318 syscalls, including 106 gettimeofday() calls. > By waving the mouse around inside a window, I get 4015 syscalls, > including 844 gettimeofday() and 1136 sigprocmask() calls in 5 > secinds. In some cases, there are consecutive gettimeofday() calls > with no other syscalls intervening. These numbers do seem somewhat > excessive. Interesting. I tried a ktrace session for about 10 seconds _without_ moving the mouse and got 71332 gettimeofday calls out of 142707 total calls and signals (all SIGALRM - 2051). After about 7 minutes with mouse movement (and typing this message), I saw 193356 gettimeofdays vs 502875 total. I (obviously) haven't looked at the code. But perhaps this is an area that could possibly be improved by more judicious use of select or kqueue and more independence of interval timing.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?18372.13307.731931.284086>