Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Firefox Developers Still Hesitant About Using EGL Over GLX On X11 Linux

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #11
    In mpv, GLX vs. EGL doesn't matter at all for fps in benchmark mode. Why would it be an issue for a browser?

    Comment


    • #12
      Originally posted by aufkrawall View Post
      In mpv, GLX vs. EGL doesn't matter at all for fps in benchmark mode. Why would it be an issue for a browser?
      Because using GLX ties you to X11 (Xorg or Xwayland). Without EGL you can't use hardware acceleration on Wayland without Xwayland.

      That's why I switched from Firefox to Chromium months ago. It simply works better on Linux for me. After Firefox dropped classic addons in 57 I have no reason to switch back.

      Comment


      • #13
        Originally posted by dragon321 View Post

        Because using GLX ties you to X11 (Xorg or Xwayland). Without EGL you can't use hardware acceleration on Wayland without Xwayland.

        That's why I switched from Firefox to Chromium months ago. It simply works better on Linux for me. After Firefox dropped classic addons in 57 I have no reason to switch back.
        Chromes Addons are even worse than Firefox's WebExtensions yanno.

        Comment


        • #14
          Originally posted by dragon321 View Post
          Because using GLX ties you to X11 (Xorg or Xwayland). Without EGL you can't use hardware acceleration on Wayland without Xwayland.
          Yeah, I'm aware of that. I was just arguing that I don't experience a performance issue with EGL in another program, unlike the Firefox dev stated.

          Comment


          • #15
            Originally posted by Anvil View Post
            Chromes Addons are even worse than Firefox's WebExtensions yanno.
            Because? WebExtension is compatible with Chrome API. You can use WE addons on Chrome too with few changes.

            Originally posted by aufkrawall View Post
            Yeah, I'm aware of that. I was just arguing that I don't experience a performance issue with EGL in another program, unlike the Firefox dev stated.
            Yeah, you're right.

            Comment


            • #16
              Originally posted by dragon321 View Post
              Because? WebExtension is compatible with Chrome API. You can use WE addons on Chrome too with few changes.
              WebExtensions is designed as a superset of the Chrome API and, modulo the bits Mozilla is still working to get implemented, Chrome cripples extensions more than Firefox does.

              (eg. Quirks of how Firefox internals handle downloads make it a major rearchitecting project to implement an onDeterminingFilename event which runs after the site-suggested filename is known but before the download starts, but Chrome lacks the webRequest.StreamFilter API, which is necessary to properly implement something like NoScript with the capability to rewrite the incoming HTTP response before the browser starts to act on it.)

              Beyond that, Chrome has no userChrome.css that you can use to re-create most of the tweaks offered in Classic Theme Restorer.

              Comment


              • #17
                Originally posted by schmidtbag View Post
                I don't get it... Firefox has all sorts of known hardware acceleration issues in Linux, and yet this guy is hesitant about EGL because of some outdated and currently ambiguous performance results? Is it really that hard to do another modern test, and analyze why it's slower (if it still is)? That doesn't sound like too much to ask...
                I don't know how much of a performance impact EGL has over GLX (whether good or bad), but I doubt it should be enough to drag down Firefox enough to prevent using EGL, unless improperly implemented.
                From what I saw when last time I tried EGL on FF: it forces GLES and uses some kind of fucked-up even-more-unmaintained codepath that works like absolute shit. It's not EGL at fault but completely broken and abandoned acceleration of FF on Linux in general.
                Last edited by dfx.; 05-26-2018, 11:51 PM.

                Comment


                • #18
                  They should switch to Vulkan / WSI altogether, especially in WebRender. No need to bother about EGL or GLX anymore.

                  Comment


                  • #19
                    Originally posted by schmidtbag View Post
                    I don't get it... Firefox has all sorts of known hardware acceleration issues in Linux, and yet this guy is hesitant about EGL because of some outdated and currently ambiguous performance results? Is it really that hard to do another modern test, and analyze why it's slower (if it still is)? That doesn't sound like too much to ask...
                    If you read the linked bug report, that's exactly what Martin has done - and while not providing numbers, he describes the speed difference as "enormous". And they're aware that this is suggestive of a problem with the implementation rather than with the EGL stack, though that doesn't necessarily make it easy to find.

                    Comment


                    • #20
                      Originally posted by shmerl View Post
                      They should switch to Vulkan / WSI altogether, especially in WebRender. No need to bother about EGL or GLX anymore.
                      So instead of finishing what they started, they shoud just throw it all out and start over, while we wait another few years?

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X