From mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi Fri Jun 17 20:45:13 2005 X-Original-To: fnaumann@mail.boerde.de Delivered-To: fnaumann@mail.boerde.de Subject: Re: [MiNT] XAAES slow? From: Evan Langlois To: MiNT List In-Reply-To: <1119031836.15790.45.camel@linuxbox> References: <1118934446.15790.7.camel@linuxbox> <0007b541.01948d720389@smtp.t-online.de> <1118973980.15790.24.camel@linuxbox> <1119028842.15790.29.camel@linuxbox> <1119029716.19495.8.camel@taro.coolrunningconcepts.com> <1119031836.15790.45.camel@linuxbox> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2005 13:43:08 -0500 Message-Id: <1119033788.19495.22.camel@taro.coolrunningconcepts.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.2.1.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - esc14.midphase.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - fishpool.com X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - CoolRunningConcepts.com X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi Errors-To: mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi X-original-sender: Evan@CoolRunningConcepts.com Precedence: bulk List-help: List-unsubscribe: List-Id: X-List-ID: X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at relay.boerde.de X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on relay.boerde.de X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.0 tagged_above=-50.5 required=7.0 tests=AWL, BAYES_00 X-Spam-Level: On Fri, 2005-06-17 at 20:10 +0200, Odd Skancke wrote: > XaAES will now start to service new WM_REDRAWS for the lagged client, > which is noticable as the redraw areas are just filled with gray color. > As soon as the client enters any of the evnt_xxx() calls, its lagged > status is cleared, and a full set of WM_REDRAW's for all its windows is > generated. Instead of redrawing all windows completely when "lagged" is cleared, can all the redraws for which XaAES has handled a redraw be merged into 1 rectangle? This would have the same effect if the whole screen had been drawn on, but could save some resources if most of the window had never been touched. > This scheme prevents applications from blocking the whole system. When would the application block the whole system? It would just eventually do its redraws. The task switching doesn't depend on the AES at all does it? > A similar thing happens when a client calls menu_popup() or form_popup > (). Since these are non-blocking now, XaAES will intercept anddraw gray > rectangles in response to WM_REDRAWS sent to its windows. This is done > so because apps think these calls should block screen. I assume you mean this is just for the application that has called menu_popup or form_popup. Do the rest of the applications still get regular redraws? -- Evan