[winswitch] Using Xpra on multi-GPU laptops
antoine at nagafix.co.uk
Wed Oct 5 06:59:43 BST 2011
On 05/10/11 01:49, Eric Appleman wrote:
> * VirtualGL doesn't expose the Nvidia hardware the way we'd like
> because VDPAU and NV17 are not accessible as video output.
> Furthermore, there is a significant performance penalty that we
> discovered is not present in more direct solutions such as
> hybrid-windump and Xpra.
> * I tried r202 last night with the following commands:
> xpra start --encoding=rgb24 -z 0 :8
> xpra attach --encoding=rgb24 -z 0 :8
(setting encoding and compression when "start"ing is not strictly
necessary if you do specify it when "attach"ing as this takes precedence)
> Is it correct? I still had the screen update problem with PNG and RGB24.
OK, that's good to know as it means that the encoding performance is
probably not causing the problem.
> * I'm not familiar with Xvfb/Xdummy. Can you explain how to use it the
> relation to Xpra?
When you start Xpra the way you did above it will normally start an Xvfb
server, not a real X11 display, which will not allow you to take
advantage of hardware acceleration. If you have an existing accelerated
X display, you should use the "--use-display" switch. I guess that ":8"
is your accelerated display? Which means starting the Xvfb failed and
xpra should have terminated with an error - will fix that..
Xdummy is just an alternative (probably not useful in your case since
you run against something else), you can find all about it here:
> * glxgears is not the best visual test. Try glxspheres or
> mplayer2/smplayer through Xpra. The latter is pretty much unusable.
I've just tried glxspheres and I don't get any artifacts with either
Xvfb or Xdummy.
But it does render very very slowly (~5fps on a core2duo).
Watching a video with mplayer works well enough though.
Since I can't reproduce your problems, I have added a switch to turn off
all damage update batching (since I suspect your hardware does more than
20fps) and upped the batching to not trigger until 30fps:
Please try this, also with "BATCH_EVENTS = False" as well as increasing
the MAX_EVENTS and decreasing the BATCH_DELAY. Hopefully, we can find
more optimal settings for your hardware.
> * The process using Xpra (and sometimes Xpra itself) is taking up a
> lot of CPU resources. I have 4 cores and 8 threads (i7-2630QM). It's
> taking up an entire core at times. I'm not sure what you mean by
There should be 2 processes, one for the client and one for the server,
which one is the bottleneck?
By CPU-bound I mean that CPU is the limiting factor.
It would also be interesting to know how much bandwidth is being used,
you should be able to work that out by using the tcp socket mode
> * The second Xserver has no physical video output. Some Optimus
> laptops have the HDMI ports wired directly to the Nvidia GPU, but we
> are not targeting these exceptions as a default case.
> Kind regards,
> On 10/04/2011 10:57 AM, Antoine Martin wrote:
>> On 04/10/11 11:11, Eric Appleman wrote:
>>> Hi, I've been fiddling around with Xpra as a replacement to the
>>> Bumblebee Project's VirtualGL backend. Bumblebee permits access to
>>> the Nvidia GPU on Optimus laptops. By using the X server it creates,
>>> we can start applications on the invisible Nvidia screen.
>>> I want Xpra to replace VirtualGL as the transport method, but I need
>>> the screen to display at a normal framerate.
>> Just out of curiosity, what makes you prefer Xpra over VirtualGL. At
>> first I thought VirtualGL would be a more natural fit, but.. maybe it
>>> I've included a demonstration that compares rendering through Xpra and
>>> without it. Feel free to drop by #bumblebee-dev on Freenode if you
>>> have ideas or questions.
>> I've looked at the video and it certainly looks interesting and
>> challenging for Xpra...
>> You haven't specified which command line options you have used or which
>> version of Xpra you are using (trunk?).
>> I would suggest you try with trunk, turn compression off, try with all 3
>> screen encoding options (rgb24, jpeg and png), with jpeg you may want to
>> try different quality settings.
>> It is a little bit strange how the screen updates seem a little
>> disjointed, but I guess that is because it is falling too far behind the
>> real screen?
>> If we can come up with a test case to reproduce this (one that does not
>> involve me buying a new laptop preferably!), then I am sure there are
>> improvements that can be made. For example, there are also some real
>> issues with the python networking code which make it less than
>> optimal... Maybe tackling those would already make a noticeable
>> difference. Is the refresh rate and artifacts very different from using
>> Xpra with Xvfb/Xdummy?
>> I've tried running glxgears in xpra, and although it's not super smooth,
>> it looks ok-ish...
>> I have recently added to trunk some code to rate-limit screen updates at
>> 20ups, maybe you hit this limit?
>> Are you CPU bound? I don't really understand the architecture of
>> bumblebee, do you get a secondary X11 display which is not actually
>> bound to any video ports?
>>> - Eric
>>> 1. Start Bumblebee X server on :8
>>> optirun glxinfo
>>> 2.Start Xpra server
>>> xpra start :8
>>> 3. Attach :8 to :0, the Intel screen
>>> xpra attach :8
>>> 4. Start applications on Nvidia screen
>>> DISPLAY=:8 glxgears
>>> 5. Repeat step 4 as necessary
>>> shifter-users mailing list
>>> shifter-users at lists.devloop.org.uk
>> shifter-users mailing list
>> shifter-users at lists.devloop.org.uk
> shifter-users mailing list
> shifter-users at lists.devloop.org.uk
More information about the shifter-users