[TT618]

Dear All.

I have used emule with wine for about 1,5 year. I use eMule 0.49b [Mephisto v2.1] - Web Interface. This is emule modification, I know.

When I use it, only with KAD, no matter do I download or upload, powertop shows me:

Top causes for wakeups:
9.1% ( 22.4) wineserver : schedule_timeout (process_timeout)
7.8% ( 19.3) emule.exe : schedule_timeout (process_timeout)

When I try to start normal unmodified emule, no matter which one 0,49b, 0,49c or 0,50a, powertop shows:
37% ( 250,7) emule.exe : schedule_timeout (process_timeout)

That means that unmodified emule makes much more CPU interrupts.

So, my question - how is it possible to reduce CPU usage by modification original emule?

Thanks.

[Nepomukl]

At Options / Display: Save CPU & Memory Usage
Enable Disenable Known Clients and Disenable Queue List, too
And Options / Expended:
Enable Disenable A4AF Checks to Save CPU

try that

File buffer size: 256.00 KB

[Ejack79]

That's interesting. I wonder how, I wonder why...

[TT618]

I am not wondering "why" - I like it.

More important that I did not configure eMule 0.49b [Mephisto v2.1] at all. I just unzip it and start with wine. Nothing else works like it, every other version use CPU ~37% ( 250,7) emule.exe : schedule_timeout (process_timeout)

I do not understand how is it possible to tweak original emule, because I want the same with 0,50a

To: Nepomukl - yours suggestions didn't help to decrease cpu interrupts, the owner of the [Mephisto v2.1] did something different, and he probably did it with purpose, so I hope next version 0.50a will be the same.
(sorry I have changed here a little big)

But should be something which helps to reduce cpu load, if it was possible.

This post has been edited by TT618: 22 December 2010 - 05:05 PM

[fox88]

Have you tested CPU load with official 0.49b?

Edit. I vaguely remember one similar trouble with high CPU load in WINE environment. There was nothing wrong with CPU load in native Windows; and the problem was in WINE.

This post has been edited by fox88: 01 November 2011 - 08:59 PM

[TT618]

I checked about 20 of different emule mods. All of them use cpu as usual ~40% ( 250)

But only eMule v0.49c [Mephisto v2.2] - my current version and previous one v2.1 gives my:
You can compare interrupts with other applications:

Top causes for wakeups:
24.2% ( 67.9) <interrupt> : uhci_hcd:usb5, yenta, i915@pci:0000:00:02.0
18.8% ( 52.8) USB device 3-2 : USB Mouse (A4Tech)
18.1% ( 50.8) <interrupt> : uhci_hcd:usb3
10.4% ( 29.1) wineserver : schedule_timeout (process_timeout)
9.9% ( 27.9) <interrupt> : eth0
6.9% ( 19.3) emule.exe : schedule_timeout (process_timeout)
3.7% ( 10.4) smplayer : schedule_timeout (process_timeout)
1.6% ( 4.6) Xorg : schedule_timeout (process_timeout)
1.5% ( 4.1) opera : schedule_timeout (process_timeout)


For example smplayer doesn't do anything at all.
I like how this mod works, and I want original emule works the same way. That is why I ask my question here.
You can try your self and compare it.

[TT618]

You all can compare:
I do not even connect to any networks:

Top causes for wakeups:
46.6% (249.8) emule0.50a.exe : schedule_timeout (process_timeout)
14.6% ( 78.3) <interrupt> : uhci_hcd:usb5, yenta, i915@pci:0000:00:02.0
9.6% ( 51.6) USB device 3-2 : USB Mouse (A4Tech)
8.9% ( 47.6) <interrupt> : uhci_hcd:usb3
7.1% ( 38.3) wineserver : schedule_timeout (process_timeout)
4.4% ( 23.8) <interrupt> : eth0
3.6% ( 19.3) emule.exe : schedule_timeout (process_timeout)
1.9% ( 10.4) smplayer : schedule_timeout (process_timeout)

[Thoronmaikaril]

This is interesting. So, does it reduce also wineserver CPU usage, which is as high as eMule's on my machine?