Closed Bug 152731 Opened 22 years ago Closed 22 years ago

These sites in China consume a lot of CPU

Categories

(Core :: Graphics: ImageLib, defect)

Product:
Core
Component:
Graphics: ImageLib
Platform:
x86
Windows 2000
Type:
defect
Priority:
Not set
Severity:
major

Tracking

()

Status:
VERIFIED DUPLICATE of bug 132759

People

(Reporter: momoi, Assigned: peterl-bugs)

References

(
URL
)

Details

(Keywords: perf, topembed, Whiteboard: [adt2 RTM]) 

** Observed with 2002-06-17 Win32 1.00 branch build **

The above site and the following sites in China all consume too much
as compared to IE5/6. 

1. http://www.163.com 
2. http://china.scmp.com/chimain/index.html
3. http://www.ccidnet.com 
4. http://www.999.com.cn/ 
5. http://www.chinadaily.com.cn 

We would like some investigation and improvement if at all possible.
All of these sites have multiple animated gif's. ImageLib creates a new image
from the raw image data for each frame which is expensive. I think the
performance/CPU usage could be greatly improved by caching all of the frames as
offscreen bitmaps and displaying them as needed. The image decoding only needs
to be done once instead of on every frame change. This would also improve memory
usage since the offscreen bitmaps are kept in video card memory and the raw data
could be released.
Assignee: attinasi → dcone
Component: Layout → ImageLib
*** Bug 152732 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
*** Bug 152733 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
*** Bug 152734 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
#1, #3, #4, and #5 in comment 0 also use flash.
I tried on my linux box with mozilla, which has no flash installed, and I saw
similar CPU consumption as with pr1 which does have Flash.
I retract my previous comment, I was seeing ghosts. On 163, without flash I get
10% cpu, with flash I get 87% (mozilla 1.0.0 for no flash and pr1 for with flash)
Win2k PIII-933 (w/flash)
Moz = Build 20020618xx 
1.0 = Mozilla 1.0 Final (20020530)
1+  = rv:1.0.0 20020618
IE6 = Internet Explorer 6.0

1. http://www.163.com/
Moz: 25%
1+ : 25%
1.0: 40%
IE6: 31%

2. http://china.scmp.com/chimain/index.html
Moz:  2%
1+ :  4%
1.0:  4%
IE6:  2%
 
3. http://www.ccidnet.com/
(memory usage kept climbing in Mozilla as long as page existed)
Moz: 50%
1+ : 97%
1.0: 99%
IE6: 65%
 
4. http://www.999.com.cn/index.htm
Moz: 91%
1+ : 91%
1.0: 91%
IE6: 99%

5. http://www1.chinadaily.com.cn/news/index.html
Moz: <1%
1+ : <1%
1.0: <1%
IE6: <1%


cc: shrir, who I remember from a previous plugin meeting had issues with flash
cpu usage 
According to a report from China, site #2's CPU consumption went up
high when the user scrolls up and down the page.

The problem with site #5 has to do with memory usage rather than
CPU consumption. It is reported that the memory usage went up to
over 65,000K while loading the page. IE's memory usage hovers around
12,000K.
With 2002061408 trunk/WinNT on a dual PII-333 w/ 320 megs:

Site #1's CPU usage seems to mostly come from the Flash animations.  If I right-
click each of them and set their quality to low, CPU usage drops in half.  The 
other half is probably a combination of all the animated GIFs and some 
JavaScript that uses setTimeout() with a timeout of 1ms to repeatedly call 
itself.  The CPU usage from the setTimeout() calls should be lessened by the 
fix for bug 123273, now appearing in a trunk build near you.

Site #3 consumes memory like there's no tomorrow, and the UI gets really, 
really sluggish.  This is probably something along the lines of one of the many 
bugs (bug 13350, bug 30942, bug 40848, bug 111982) where something consumes all 
available CPU time and something else doesn't get to happen or the UI becomes 
unresponsive.

Site #4 makes the UI totally unresponsive (except for scrolling) -- I had to 
kill mozilla's process to get out.

Sites #2 and #5 seem okay, with no scrolling speed problems or memory/CPU use 
problems.
If Flash (6) is causing this, then this could be a dup of bug 132759. Older
versions of Flash may not have this problem.
confirmed these sites are using flash. Yeah, this is a worldwide problem ;). 
Nominating...
Keywords: nsbeta1, perf, topembed
One of the buggest China site, 

http://www.sohu.com

is a killer with many flash images going at the same time. 
We need a solution to this problem! Otherwise, we will not
be able to get people in China to use our client!
www.sina.com.cn and www.sohu.com are among the top 5 sites
in China. This performance looks very bad.
Keywords: nsbeta1 → nsbeta1+
Whiteboard: [adt2 RTM]
Hey Kevin, no offense, but when is the last time you looked at libpr0n? Animated
GIF frame caching is one of the first things we did. If that isn't working it is
a serious bug. If it got changed, someone really should have run that by me...

Anyway, it looks like Flash is actually the problem here perhaps in combination
with another issue where we're eating memory. 

On the memory intensive page, is it all GIFs by chance?

For the Flash pages, perhaps we have excessive reflow/repaint occuring if the
problem isn't in Flash itself?
*** Bug 152994 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
"Hey Kevin, no offense, but when is the last time you looked at libpr0n?".

Sorry, I had the wrong info. I was told recently that we never optimize animated
gifs because they are continously decoded per frame instead of being held around
as individual nsIImages. I recently fixed a printing bug where non optimized
images for animated gif's where being asked to print. If all of the images
animated and non animated are held as nsIImages shouldn't we be optimizing the
animated gif's so they are stored in video card memory and free up main memory?
This is a dup of http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=132759

This is a regression in the Flash 6 player on Windows. Shrir tells me Flash 5
does not have this problem.
Maybe it is a dupe of Bug 132759 but that bugs has been minused for topembed. 
This bug should be topembed.
well, we need help from macromedia on this one,no ? Arun had conveyed this cpu 
issue a month back to them...haven't heard of anything till now. Peter?
you know more about this than I..
Assignee: dcone → peterl
Kat,

I'm not getting any difference in CPU between IE 6 and 0618/1.0 on
www.sina.com.cn w/ Flash 6 on WinXP. What do I need to do to see this bug? I did
not install the lang pack.

If you are seeing this bug, please try to remove Flash completely (rename
npswf32.dll to 01npswf32.dll) and see if the CPU still pegs.
Today's http://www.sina.com.cn page doesn't have the pop-up flash ad (It useds
to have a big pop-up flash ad). 06/18 builds uses a little bit less CPU than
IE6. (Netscape uses about 38% while IE6 uses about 55%)
The Flash regression is known, and we are talking to Macromedia about getting it
fixed ASAP. I believe that is the entire meat of this bug.
this should have been marked nsbeta1- already, this is outside the mozilla
application, see bug 132759
Keywords: nsbeta1+ → nsbeta1-
Can at least the offending .swf files causing the 100% CPU in these pages be
isolated so the site could be evangelized to modify their content?
Using Flash 6.0 d30 I noticed that the CPU load appears to be slightly higher
but the UI still responded with a few more sites. Eventually, however, moz's UI
stopped responding.
This is a dup of bug 132759. If you find simplified testcases which reproduce
this bug without Flash, please reopen.

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 132759 ***
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 22 years ago
Resolution: --- → DUPLICATE
v
Status: RESOLVED → VERIFIED
Blocks: 154896
No longer blocks: 154896
Blocks: 154896
*** Bug 148271 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
No longer blocks: 154896
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.