Slow konqe on a PXA250

[Cliff Brake]

Correct.  Konqe seems faster when components are compiled without debuggi=
ng.

Cliff

------------------------------------------
On Thursday 21 November 2002 08:43 am, Mayuresh Kathe wrote:
That was a *GREAT* piece of work...

Thanks for sharing it with us Cliff :)

BTW, did you mean to say that you observed an enhancement in speed when
you _disabled_ debugging in Qt/e and Konq/e?

~Mayuresh

On Thu, 21 Nov 2002, Cliff Brake wrote:
> The major differences between the SA1110 and PXA250
>
> - SA1110 uses the DEC designed StrongARM (based on ARMV4) core.  The PX=
A250
> 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 interface, etc.
> - Neither part include a USB host controller, both include a USB client
> (device? -- I always forget the term...) controller.
>
> We have been runing konqe on our PXA250 IDP product and it seems to wor=
k
> fine -- about the same speed as IE on WinCE.  I noticed a big differenc=
e in
> speed 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 th=
e
> > > 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 separ=
ate
> 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 fo=
r
> 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
>
> _______________________________________________
> konq-e mailing list
> konq-e@mail.kde.org
> http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/konq-e

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