Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Pat Clark" data-source="post: 924285" data-attributes="member: 123421">I enabled both MMCSS -- worse. About the same as 3 buffers and no MMCSS -- perhaps 150-200 drops in 10000 frames.Enabled MMCSS Scheduler -- much better. 1 reported drop in 10000 frames. (7 buffers).Enabled MMCSS DWM -- very good. 5 reported drops in 10000 frames. (7 buffers).&nbsp;As it was (with 7 buffers, neither MMCSS enabled) it was about 15-20 reported drops in 10000.&nbsp;The actual display may have been drop-free in many cases if renderer can be late but buffering covers it up. I can't tell for sure, but the display is not noticeably interrupted when a single drop is reported. In every case, there is a burst of drops (just a few) as the channel starts. I have ignored these.&nbsp;As soon as wife leaves (she hates debugging -- I love it), I'll try to lower buffers and see what happens, although the memory usage is not a problem here, I think.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Pat Clark, post: 924285, member: 123421"] I enabled both MMCSS -- worse. About the same as 3 buffers and no MMCSS -- perhaps 150-200 drops in 10000 frames. Enabled MMCSS Scheduler -- much better. 1 reported drop in 10000 frames. (7 buffers). Enabled MMCSS DWM -- very good. 5 reported drops in 10000 frames. (7 buffers). As it was (with 7 buffers, neither MMCSS enabled) it was about 15-20 reported drops in 10000. The actual display may have been drop-free in many cases if renderer can be late but buffering covers it up. I can't tell for sure, but the display is not noticeably interrupted when a single drop is reported. In every case, there is a burst of drops (just a few) as the channel starts. I have ignored these. As soon as wife leaves (she hates debugging -- I love it), I'll try to lower buffers and see what happens, although the memory usage is not a problem here, I think. [/QUOTE]

Verification