From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1QdsrM-0003wk-OE for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 04 Jul 2011 23:47:24 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 1449B21C036; Mon, 4 Jul 2011 23:45:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-qw0-f53.google.com (mail-qw0-f53.google.com [209.85.216.53]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DDDF421C036 for ; Mon, 4 Jul 2011 23:45:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: by qwb7 with SMTP id 7so3671737qwb.40 for ; Mon, 04 Jul 2011 16:45:41 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=GEUwWBbilC81DGbTe4WcRcsD2tld8uwKQH+Ot8kwU6I=; b=pCe0XvHFuUZGeqo2OcDD1naBGUpjCs1cpQe0Ve3WJG28jLDBufsOCDk9awtit0clTo 5U26Ws9OifFQSTs4NxlaJHnFIi7yIjsQbFUTajtSJ6y1szN9ZKdRGiZTCPpTPLNNDKHV jTB9o+xHGgcXp0mxKZmc4AFmi/OveZEcCBHTg= Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.224.28.79 with SMTP id l15mr3819063qac.128.1309823141316; Mon, 04 Jul 2011 16:45:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.224.19.204 with HTTP; Mon, 4 Jul 2011 16:45:41 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <1687519.c4FbnAJ9Ol@nazgul> References: <87wrfzm4bv.fsf@newsguy.com> <1556833.9VQajMqomY@nazgul> <1687519.c4FbnAJ9Ol@nazgul> Date: Mon, 4 Jul 2011 16:45:41 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: about boot with framebuffer From: Mark Knecht To: Alan McKinnon Cc: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Archives-Salt: X-Archives-Hash: b9ba31dac22171adcd68bd8bd72eb58a On Mon, Jul 4, 2011 at 2:34 PM, Alan McKinnon wrote: > On Monday 04 July 2011 14:15:12 Mark Knecht did opine thusly: >> I'm curious, however, about my Gentoo VMs. Can KMS run on a VM's >> kernel and do anything useful there? This is more for learning and >> not about any practical need at this time. > > From my understanding, this topic gets yucky. There's a whole bunch of > ways this could be done, from software emulation to para- > virtualization to full virtualization. Emulation is easy - KMS in the > guest sees what looks for all the world like hardware so everything > works if KMS supports the emulated card (albeit slowly). For > everything else, you'd need kernel drivers intercepting efforts to > talk to the hardware and be traffic cop. My brain is already spinning > on this so please excuse me while I go dunk my head in a bucket and > not think about it anymore :-) > So I'm wondering if the Virtualbox graphics driver (xf86-video-virtualbox) is a framebuffer local to the VM or something else? My NVidia GFX465 running the NVidia driver does about 11,000 FPS in glxgears in Linux. glxgears running in the VM does about 130FPS, or around 1% of the performance outside. Yes, it's 'slow', depending on how we define slow. It's faster then machine I ran native in Linux 5 years ago, and it's very usable for things like browsers, etc. I don't know what tool to use to measure graphics performance on Windows but my Windows XP VM is more than fast enough to watch Netflix full screen at 1920x1080 without any major amount of tearing, so Virtualbox graphics performance there is fine. Anyway, just data. Thanks, Mark