Hello all. I'm running dillo2 on FreeBSD 6.3. When I visit this page http://www.itmedia.co.jp/bizid/, somehow Xorg occupies lot of processing power and value of CPU in top command shows more than 85%. Does anybody have an idea? What would be the reason? Regards, furaisanjin
Hello, On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 11:10:09PM +0900, ???? wrote:
Hello all.
I'm running dillo2 on FreeBSD 6.3. When I visit this page http://www.itmedia.co.jp/bizid/, somehow Xorg occupies lot of processing power and value of CPU in top command shows more than 85%. Does anybody have an idea? What would be the reason?
I can't reproduce it on DragonFlyBSD. Is there still a high CPU usage after the page has finished loading? What font are you using? Do you see similar behaviour on other pages? Cheers, Johannes
furaisanjin wrote:
I'm running dillo2 on FreeBSD 6.3. When I visit this page http://www.itmedia.co.jp/bizid/, somehow Xorg occupies lot of processing power and value of CPU in top command shows more than 85%. Does anybody have an idea? What would be the reason?
I don't know; it seems fine for me in Linux...
On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 02:26:31PM +0000, corvid wrote:
furaisanjin wrote:
I'm running dillo2 on FreeBSD 6.3. When I visit this page http://www.itmedia.co.jp/bizid/, somehow Xorg occupies lot of processing power and value of CPU in top command shows more than 85%. Does anybody have an idea? What would be the reason?
I don't know; it seems fine for me in Linux...
Same here, running Linux, whole page loads with very little CPU usage. Jeremy Henty
On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 11:10:09PM +0900, ?$BIwPT;6?M wrote:
Hello all.
I'm running dillo2 on FreeBSD 6.3. When I visit this page http://www.itmedia.co.jp/bizid/, somehow Xorg occupies lot of processing power and value of CPU in top command shows more than 85%. Does anybody have an idea? What would be the reason?
Just guessing, but is your fltk2 using cairo? That's been the cause of other problems. Regards, Jeremy Henty
2008/10/21 Jeremy Henty <onepoint@starurchin.org>:
Just guessing, but is your fltk2 using cairo? That's been the cause of other problems.
no, I didn't add any option for fltk2. I find the reason now. I selected this option. limit_text_width=YES I missed the comment just above. # *** NOT HOOKED UP YET *** So after I set NO on limit_text_width, the problem has disappeared. Regards, furaisanjin
furaisanjin wrote:
I find the reason now. I selected this option.
limit_text_width=YES
I missed the comment just above.
# *** NOT HOOKED UP YET ***
So after I set NO on limit_text_width, the problem has disappeared.
Oh! You have still found something interesting because I added that comment _not_ because it was known to break anything, but because there is not enough limit_text_width code for it to have much of an observable effect -- that is, I didn't want people to be disappointed when they set the option and nothing happened. (Johannes will know, but...) maybe it's triggering queueResize()s in a loop.
On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 12:19:15PM +0000, corvid wrote:
furaisanjin wrote:
I find the reason now. I selected this option.
limit_text_width=YES
I missed the comment just above.
# *** NOT HOOKED UP YET ***
So after I set NO on limit_text_width, the problem has disappeared.
Oh! You have still found something interesting because I added that comment _not_ because it was known to break anything, but because there is not enough limit_text_width code for it to have much of an observable effect -- that is, I didn't want people to be disappointed when they set the option and nothing happened.
(Johannes will know, but...) maybe it's triggering queueResize()s in a loop.
void Textblock::setWidth (int width) { /* If limitTextWidth is set to YES, a queue_resize may also be * necessary. */ if (availWidth != width || limitTextWidth) { looks like a candidate... But I have not seen a page where limit_text_width=YES makes a difference anyway. Cheers, Johannes
participants (4)
-
corvid＠lavabit.com -
furaisanjin＠gmail.com -
Johannes.Hofmann＠gmx.de -
onepoint＠starurchin.org