Slow konqe on a PXA250

[Cliff Brake]

The major differences between the SA1110 and PXA250

- SA1110 uses the DEC designed StrongARM (based on ARMV4) core.  The PXA2=
50=20
uses the intel designed Xscale ARM core (based on ARMV5).
- The SA1110 tops at 209MHz, the PXA250 at 398MHz
- The PXA250 includes some additional peripherals on chip such as MMC, AC=
-Link=20
interface, etc.
- Neither part include a USB host controller, both include a USB client=20
(device? -- I always forget the term...) controller.

We have been runing konqe on our PXA250 IDP product and it seems to work =
fine=20
-- about the same speed as IE on WinCE.  I noticed a big difference in sp=
eed=20
when debugging was enabled in some of the components (konqe, QT, etc).

Cliff


------------------------------------------
On Wednesday 20 November 2002 10:54 am, Mayuresh Kathe wrote:
On Wed, 20 Nov 2002, Simon Hausmann wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 20, 2002 at 11:28:18AM +0100, Daniel Stenberg wrote:
> > Hm, does Konq/e create new threads often? I found a post over at the
> > armlinux-kernel list that identified a problem in the Linux process
> > creation code for the PXA...
>
> konq/e does not make use of threads (clone(2) and friends) , it
> still creates child processes for network IO though. I'd be
> surprised though if the creation of the processes is what gives the
> bad performance you experience. (I mean... you'd notice that in the
> whole system I guess)

Hey, Simon, wouldn't it more efficient to have threads instead of separat=
e
processes? (Qt/e threads)

> I'm clueless about the PXA cpus. Are they particularly bad or good
> at integer or fpu arithmetic? Do they lack an fpu at all like the
> arm modules?

PXA are an extended version of StrongARM, I guess with added support for
USB and a couple of other things within the chip (which was outside
earlier)
Just adding my own 4 bits, is that a nibble ;^)

~Mayuresh


_______________________________________________
konq-e mailing list
konq-e@mail.kde.org
http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/konq-e