No, vlc creates between 15% and 25% load, when using XVideo output without
scaling: (source are plain unencrypted vob files on the server).
1 0 1 0 51688 16 620376 0 0 0 0 1232 1068 25 1 74
2 0 0 0 50792 16 621272 0 0 0 0 1091 985 22 2 76
0 0 0 0 49772 16 622296 0 0 0 0 1246 1124 21 2 77
0 0 0 0 48620 16 623448 0 0 0 0 1346 1129 24 2 74
3 0 0 0 47720 16 624344 0 0 0 0 1086 960 14 5 81
1 0 0 0 46696 16 625368 0 0 0 0 1227 1096 23 3 74
0 0 0 0 45932 16 626136 0 0 0 0 970 913 19 1 80
0 0 0 0 44908 16 627160 0 0 0 0 1242 1061 21 1 78
2 0 0 0 43756 16 628312 0 0 0 0 1339 1052 18 5 77
1 0 0 0 42852 16 629208 0 0 0 0 1108 1006 18 0 82
0 0 0 0 41828 16 630232 0 0 0 0 1229 1112 17 0 83
3 0 0 0 40676 16 631384 0 0 0 0 1358 1111 18 4 78
0 0 0 0 39524 16 632536 0 0 0 0 1359 1114 17 3 80
0 0 0 0 38628 16 633432 0 0 0 0 1170 1070 14 1 85
4 0 0 0 37600 16 634456 0 0 0 0 1217 1005 18 1 81
0 0 0 0 36836 16 635224 0 0 0 0 1003 997 18 1 81
1 0 0 0 35812 16 636248 0 0 0 0 1241 1035 17 3 80
1 0 1 0 34788 16 637272 0 0 0 0 1232 1020 15 2 83
2 0 1 0 33888 16 638168 0 0 0 0 1092 963 16 2 82
3 0 0 0 32872 16 639192 0 0 0 0 1239 1097 20 2 78
0 0 0 0 31840 16 640216 0 0 0 0 1249 1136 13 4 83
4 0 0 0 30688 16 641368 0 0 0 0 1329 1043 17 4 79
0 0 0 0 29664 16 642392 0 0 0 0 2273 2045 18 9 73
0 0 0 0 28640 16 643416 0 0 0 0 1218 1045 16 2 82
2 0 0 0 27904 16 644184 0 0 0 0 1085 1400 22 1 77
1 0 0 0 27256 16 644824 0 0 0 0 1106 1386 24 3 73
0 0 0 0 26360 16 645720 0 0 0 0 1320 1391 24 2 74
Fullscreen mode (scaling) takes approx. 5% more.
1 0 0 0 4440 16 668124 0 0 0 0 1494 2580 26 2 72
1 0 0 0 4372 16 668252 0 0 0 0 1307 1465 27 2 71
1 0 0 0 4364 16 668252 0 0 0 0 1284 2991 38 1 61
0 0 0 0 4404 16 668252 0 0 0 0 1114 1482 30 2 68
2 0 0 0 4416 16 668252 0 0 0 0 1111 1031 24 1 75
1 0 0 0 4432 16 668252 0 0 0 0 1210 1076 21 2 77
0 0 0 0 4444 16 668252 0 0 0 0 1260 1195 20 3 77
2 0 0 0 4448 16 668252 0 0 0 0 1240 1101 27 1 72
0 0 0 0 4456 16 668252 0 0 0 0 1367 1171 26 1 73
0 0 0 0 4448 16 668252 0 0 0 0 1388 1182 24 2 74
3 0 0 0 4448 16 668252 0 0 0 0 1236 1065 24 2 75
0 0 0 0 4444 16 668252 0 0 0 0 1372 1199 26 1 73
0 0 0 0 4444 16 668252 0 0 0 0 1373 1194 27 0 73
3 0 0 0 4444 16 668252 0 0 0 0 1364 1101 24 2 75
0 0 0 0 4444 16 668252 0 0 0 0 1246 1103 26 2 72
0 0 0 0 4448 16 668252 0 0 0 0 1348 1077 24 2 74
2 0 0 0 4448 16 668252 0 0 0 0 1374 1239 25 3 73
0 0 0 0 4400 16 668252 0 0 0 0 1881 1697 25 4 71
0 0 0 0 4412 16 668252 0 0 0 0 1113 1004 26 0 74
2 0 0 0 4444 16 667996 0 0 0 0 1388 2767 38 3 59
1 0 0 0 4392 16 668124 0 0 0 0 1425 1418 27 3 70
0 0 0 0 4476 16 668252 0 0 0 0 1603 1725 25 4 71
1 0 0 0 4376 16 668380 0 0 0 0 1491 1427 27 3 70
You can see, enough idleness...
The question is, why amd_disconnect=true causes this distortion. I tend to
believe that dis-/reconnecting CPU takes simply too long in this scenario.
> daniel
>
>
> # Daniel Nofftz
> # Sysadmin CIP-Pool Informatik
> # University of Trier(Germany), Room V 103
> # Mail: daniel@nofftz.de
Cheers,
Hans-Peter
-
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/