Closed
Bug 729082
Opened 12 years ago
Closed 12 years ago
MAPLE - Jerky panning
Categories
(Firefox for Android Graveyard :: General, defect, P1)
Tracking
(blocking-fennec1.0 beta+)
RESOLVED
DUPLICATE
of bug 734164
Tracking | Status | |
---|---|---|
blocking-fennec1.0 | --- | beta+ |
People
(Reporter: aaronmt, Unassigned)
References
Details
(Keywords: perf, Whiteboard: MAPLE mwc-demo [gfx])
Panning is jerky and more noticeable than trunk mozilla-central builds. Tested via panning the URL: http://androidandme.com -- Latest Maple Android (02/21) Samsung Galaxy Nexus (Android 4.0.2) Mozilla/5.0 (Android; Mobile; rv:13.0) Gecko/13.0 Firefox/13.0a1
Reporter | ||
Comment 1•12 years ago
|
||
When I pan the frame-rate ranges between 1FPS~20FPS. I expected ~60FPS.
Comment 2•12 years ago
|
||
Testcase here: With Aurora I get as result: 12887ms With Maple I get as result: 22961ms. This is on the Samsung Galaxy Nexus, Android 4.0.2.
Comment 3•12 years ago
|
||
Sorry, here is the testcase: http://people.mozilla.org/~mwargers/tests/performance/textscrolling.htm
Reporter | ||
Updated•12 years ago
|
Whiteboard: maple
Updated•12 years ago
|
Priority: -- → P1
Comment 4•12 years ago
|
||
Needs assignee.
Updated•12 years ago
|
Keywords: fennecnative-betablocker
Updated•12 years ago
|
Whiteboard: maple → MAPLE mwc-demo
Comment 5•12 years ago
|
||
Some more testcases here (regarding scrolling) that seem to be slower with Maple: http://people.mozilla.org/~mwargers/tests/performance/
Comment 7•12 years ago
|
||
The solution to this is probably incremental texture upload and SurfaceTexture on ICS. I'm not very bullish on gralloc at the moment, except as a last resort if we can't satisfactorily work around the GPU bugs blocking incremental texture upload.
Updated•12 years ago
|
blocking-fennec1.0: --- → beta+
Reporter | ||
Comment 8•12 years ago
|
||
Much better with bug 732013.
Updated•12 years ago
|
Blocks: land-maple
Updated•12 years ago
|
No longer blocks: land-maple
Updated•12 years ago
|
Whiteboard: MAPLE mwc-demo → MAPLE mwc-demo [gfx]
Comment 9•12 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Martijn Wargers [:mw22] (QA - IRC nick: mw22) from comment #5) > Some more testcases here (regarding scrolling) that seem to be slower with > Maple: http://people.mozilla.org/~mwargers/tests/performance/ Martijn - Can you run the tests again on Aurora and Nightly. Also try running it on Stock and Chrome too. Thanks.
Comment 10•12 years ago
|
||
Samsung Galaxy Nexus used for testing http://people.mozilla.org/~mwargers/tests/performance/textscrolling.htm Aurora build (from 4-2): 13651ms Nightly build (from 4-2): 33257ms Stock browser: 4200ms Chrome Beta: 4285ms http://people.mozilla.org/~mwargers/tests/performance/dottedborderscrolling_moredots.htm Aurora build (from 4-2): 78102ms Nightly build (from 4-2): 54629ms Stock browser: 4163ms Chrome beta: 4166ms (but Chrome beta doesn't seem to render the side borders) http://people.mozilla.org/~mwargers/tests/performance/361754_bad_scrolling_largebackground.htm Aurora build (from 4-2): 38733ms Nightly build (from 4-2): 11098ms Stock browser: 8248ms Chrome beta: 8733ms
Keywords: qawanted
Comment 11•12 years ago
|
||
Duping because there is little independent value in this bug anymore.
Comment 12•12 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Martijn Wargers [:mw22] (QA - IRC nick: mw22) from comment #10) > Samsung Galaxy Nexus used for testing > http://people.mozilla.org/~mwargers/tests/performance/textscrolling.htm > Aurora build (from 4-2): 13651ms > Nightly build (from 4-2): 33257ms > Stock browser: 4200ms > Chrome Beta: 4285ms > > http://people.mozilla.org/~mwargers/tests/performance/ > dottedborderscrolling_moredots.htm > Aurora build (from 4-2): 78102ms > Nightly build (from 4-2): 54629ms > Stock browser: 4163ms > Chrome beta: 4166ms (but Chrome beta doesn't seem to render the side borders) > > http://people.mozilla.org/~mwargers/tests/performance/ > 361754_bad_scrolling_largebackground.htm > Aurora build (from 4-2): 38733ms > Nightly build (from 4-2): 11098ms > Stock browser: 8248ms > Chrome beta: 8733ms These are all measuring painting performance because the scrolling is driven by content script instead of happening asynchronously. They should probably all be separate bugs.
Updated•12 years ago
|
No longer blocks: nativefennecgllayers
Comment 13•12 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Jeff Muizelaar [:jrmuizel] from comment #12) > (In reply to Martijn Wargers [:mw22] (QA - IRC nick: mw22) from comment #10) > > Samsung Galaxy Nexus used for testing > > http://people.mozilla.org/~mwargers/tests/performance/textscrolling.htm > > Aurora build (from 4-2): 13651ms > > Nightly build (from 4-2): 33257ms > > Stock browser: 4200ms > > Chrome Beta: 4285ms > > > > http://people.mozilla.org/~mwargers/tests/performance/ > > dottedborderscrolling_moredots.htm > > Aurora build (from 4-2): 78102ms > > Nightly build (from 4-2): 54629ms > > Stock browser: 4163ms > > Chrome beta: 4166ms (but Chrome beta doesn't seem to render the side borders) > > > > http://people.mozilla.org/~mwargers/tests/performance/ > > 361754_bad_scrolling_largebackground.htm > > Aurora build (from 4-2): 38733ms > > Nightly build (from 4-2): 11098ms > > Stock browser: 8248ms > > Chrome beta: 8733ms > > These are all measuring painting performance because the scrolling is driven > by content script instead of happening asynchronously. They should probably > all be separate bugs. Martijn, can we get these filed seperately as requested?
Keywords: qawanted
Assignee | ||
Updated•3 years ago
|
Product: Firefox for Android → Firefox for Android Graveyard
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•