Re: OpenGL driver consumes 100% CPU
- From: David Schwartz <davids@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2008 10:45:18 -0800 (PST)
On Dec 2, 10:17 am, David Barrett-Lennard <davi...@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
You claim there's no point bothering to switch to the idle process.
Of course but so what? How is such a scenario relevant to my case
where there is useful low priority, on going work to be done by the
CPU?
Unfortunately, one most operating systems, priority is too coarse a
tool. The operating system presumes that if a higher-priority thread
is ready-to-run, you would prefer it to run that thread. You've given
your higher priority thread an effectively unlimited amount of work to
do, so it's not surprising that your lower priority threads get
starved.
I'm aware that the call to glFinish is not required. I was
interested in whether anyone could say why it causes both processors
to be fully utilised.
Because you've force the rendering engine to tell you when it's done,
so it can't stop running. And you are waiting for it, so you can't
stop running.
Are you double-buffering?
DS
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: OpenGL driver consumes 100% CPU
- From: David Barrett-Lennard
- Re: OpenGL driver consumes 100% CPU
- References:
- Re: OpenGL driver consumes 100% CPU
- From: David Schwartz
- Re: OpenGL driver consumes 100% CPU
- From: David Barrett-Lennard
- Re: OpenGL driver consumes 100% CPU
- From: David Schwartz
- Re: OpenGL driver consumes 100% CPU
- From: David Barrett-Lennard
- Re: OpenGL driver consumes 100% CPU
- Prev by Date: Re: Win32, C++, alertable sleep + volatile flag ordering question.
- Next by Date: pthread_cancel() and c++ destructors
- Previous by thread: Re: OpenGL driver consumes 100% CPU
- Next by thread: Re: OpenGL driver consumes 100% CPU
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading