Launchpad has imported 31 comments from the remote bug at https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=791535.
If you reply to an imported comment from within Launchpad, your comment will be sent to the remote bug automatically. Read more about Launchpad's inter-bugtracker facilities at https://help.launchpad.net/InterBugTracking. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2012-09-16T09:13:30+00:00 toralf wrote: User Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:15.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/15.0.1 Build ID: 20120907154448 Steps to reproduce: started Thunderbird and forgot to type in the password Actual results: 4-core CPU is up to 100%, fan is very noisy Expected results: a (milli)sleep in that source code loop to keep my ThinkPad quiet and cool Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/thunderbird/+bug/1209095/comments/0 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2012-10-09T15:48:32+00:00 toralf wrote: maybe a blinking task bar window should be enough for forgetful people like me. Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/thunderbird/+bug/1209095/comments/1 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2012-12-04T18:18:00+00:00 Vseerror wrote: I see this with imap account Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/thunderbird/+bug/1209095/comments/2 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2012-12-04T19:09:45+00:00 Vseerror wrote: steps 1. start thunderbird 2. click on imap account folder where it is set to check for new messages at X interval and does NOT have account password saved. results: password prompt comes up progress meter spins not 100% reproducible after first occurrence, unless you restart thunderbird Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/thunderbird/+bug/1209095/comments/3 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2012-12-04T20:12:54+00:00 Acelists wrote: OK, this is a good reproducible case, I can see it. Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/thunderbird/+bug/1209095/comments/4 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2012-12-04T20:32:18+00:00 Acelists wrote: So in case of this statusbar scrollbar it is defined in mail/base/content/mailWindowOverlay.xul id="statusbar-progresspanel". The progress is updated in mail/base/content/mailWindow.js::updateProgress . From what I could see we DO NOT call this function often (only once at beginning and once at finish of the progressbar. It is an "undetermined" mode progress bar so it spins by itself once started. It seems the internal XUL implementation of the progressmeter widget is not very efficient. The implementation is in mozilla/toolkit/content/widgets/progressmeter.xml <binding id="progressmeter-undetermined">. There seems to be a tight loop calling mozRequestAnimationFrame() without any throttling (if the mozRequestAnimationFrame does not have any). According to http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webperf/raw- file/tip/specs/RequestAnimationFrame/Overview.html this is the intended operation and the application (FF/TB) determines how many frames per second it generates. So I am not sure what we can do here. Any anybody check if the progressbar in Firefox is also that CPU heavy? Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/thunderbird/+bug/1209095/comments/5 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2012-12-04T20:34:22+00:00 Acelists wrote: Moving to Frontend until we determine if this shouldn't actually go into Toolkit. But Security component was way off. Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/thunderbird/+bug/1209095/comments/6 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2012-12-04T20:42:33+00:00 Bzbarsky wrote: mozRequestAnimationFrame throttles to run no more than at 60Hz. That's its whole purpose. Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/thunderbird/+bug/1209095/comments/7 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2012-12-04T20:53:50+00:00 Acelists wrote: Is it possible to request even lower framerate? It seems it is quite CPU heavy. The reporter talks 100% of 4-core CPU. But in my testing a tiny progressmeter took 40% of 1 core on a 3Ghz machine. Still a lot. Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/thunderbird/+bug/1209095/comments/8 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2012-12-04T21:03:10+00:00 Bzbarsky wrote: > Is it possible to request even lower framerate? Not easily, no. However the callee can of course throttle lower by just checking the call time, which is passed to the method... Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/thunderbird/+bug/1209095/comments/9 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2012-12-04T22:25:31+00:00 Acelists wrote: Thanks. So I modified the binding to only set the spacer properties 3x per second but the CPU usage is not that much down. There must be some other slowness. Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/thunderbird/+bug/1209095/comments/10 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2012-12-04T22:33:06+00:00 Vseerror wrote: Do the profiler links in Bug 562977 reveal anything for you? Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/thunderbird/+bug/1209095/comments/11 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2012-12-05T00:29:14+00:00 Neil-httl wrote: (In reply to aceman from comment #5) > Any anybody check if the progressbar in Firefox is also that CPU heavy? Depends on the OS; on the Mac it's drawn natively, on Windows there were plans but they didn't come to fruition. It takes up lots of CPU on my Linux system though. Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/thunderbird/+bug/1209095/comments/12 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2012-12-05T01:46:10+00:00 Bzbarsky wrote: > Do the profiler links in Bug 562977 reveal anything for you? Mostly painting, no? Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/thunderbird/+bug/1209095/comments/13 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2012-12-05T11:21:21+00:00 Acelists wrote: Neil, yes, the original report and also my tests are from Linux. But there is also a noticeable load on Windows XP, like 40% of 1 core of a Core 2 Duo CPU at 2Ghz. Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/thunderbird/+bug/1209095/comments/14 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2013-09-16T17:52:42+00:00 Vseerror wrote: see bug 602126 / Bug 602964 Is this the same presentation method? Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/thunderbird/+bug/1209095/comments/16 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2013-09-16T18:42:46+00:00 Acelists wrote: No idea, but with TB26 I still see the high CPU usage while a progressbar is spinning. Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/thunderbird/+bug/1209095/comments/17 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2013-09-16T18:53:36+00:00 Vseerror wrote: (In reply to n...@parkwaycc.co.uk from comment #12) > on Windows there were plans but they didn't come to fruition. It takes up > lots of CPU on my Linux > system though. is there a bug# for these plans? Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/thunderbird/+bug/1209095/comments/18 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2013-09-16T18:54:41+00:00 Vseerror wrote: matti do you see this on SM? iirc you run all 3 platforms - what numbers do you get? Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/thunderbird/+bug/1209095/comments/19 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2013-09-16T22:41:51+00:00 Neil-httl wrote: (In reply to Wayne Mery from comment #17) > (In reply to comment #12) > > on Windows there were plans but they didn't come to fruition. > > is there a bug# for these plans? Yes, I ended up chasing bug 658829 myself and got the patches landed (and also bug 729649 for good measure), so progress meters don't use XBL animation any more on Windows. (I'm not sure what the name of the animation they use now is called, or whether it uses more or less CPU.) Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/thunderbird/+bug/1209095/comments/20 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2014-03-02T18:32:56+00:00 Bugzilla-tf wrote: I currently can't test on Linux due to my limited time Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/thunderbird/+bug/1209095/comments/21 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2014-06-02T10:28:27+00:00 Acelists wrote: Does anybody still see this? Win TB32, in Win XP (as in comment 14) I can't see the high CPU usage. Via DOM Inspector, in TB main window (chrome://messenger/content/messenger.xul) I found <statusbarpanel id ="statusbar-progresspanel"> where I set collapsed="true" to uncover the status bar progress meter. Then in <progressmeter id="statusbar-icon"> I set mode="undetermined". The progress bar began spinning without much CPU usage. So the progressbar alone doesn't seem to be the culprit. If we can find the CPU usage in other scenario, maybe something else is contributing to it. Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/thunderbird/+bug/1209095/comments/22 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2014-06-02T10:36:04+00:00 Neil-httl wrote: Bug 658829 changed the way undetermined progress meters were painted on Windows from an XBL implementation to a native implementation. Linux still uses the XBL implementation for undetermined progress meters though. Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/thunderbird/+bug/1209095/comments/23 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2016-09-12T01:51:49+00:00 Vseerror wrote: *** Bug 1301997 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/thunderbird/+bug/1209095/comments/25 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2016-09-12T01:55:14+00:00 Vseerror wrote: (In reply to n...@parkwaycc.co.uk from comment #22) > Bug 658829 changed the way undetermined progress meters were painted on > Windows from an XBL implementation to a native implementation. Linux still > uses the XBL implementation for undetermined progress meters though. The linux side is bug 854093. Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/thunderbird/+bug/1209095/comments/26 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2017-09-30T15:10:51+00:00 Wls220spring wrote: I can't reproduce this using Ubuntu Thunderbird 52.3.0 on Ubuntu. My 3-core CPU is at 12% Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/thunderbird/+bug/1209095/comments/27 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2018-09-11T17:43:06+00:00 Vseerror wrote: *** Bug 1490245 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/thunderbird/+bug/1209095/comments/29 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2018-09-12T04:57:32+00:00 PeterPall wrote: @WaltS48: A 3 core with Hyperthreading has 6 logical cores. 12% is 100% of one of the logical cores your CPU provides. @aceman: On MS Windows I don't know. But on Linux if thunderbird is waiting for input from keyboard or the network it still uses a full CPU core. Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/thunderbird/+bug/1209095/comments/32 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2018-09-30T01:46:11+00:00 Vseerror wrote: (In reply to :aceman from comment #21) > Does anybody still see this? Win TB32, in Win XP (as in comment 14) I can't > see the high CPU usage. Via DOM Inspector, in TB main window > (chrome://messenger/content/messenger.xul) I found <statusbarpanel > id="statusbar-progresspanel"> where I set collapsed="true" to uncover the > status bar progress meter. Then in <progressmeter id="statusbar-icon"> I set > mode="undetermined". The progress bar began spinning without much CPU usage. > So the progressbar alone doesn't seem to be the culprit. If we can find the > CPU usage in other scenario, maybe something else is contributing to it. for linux see Gunter's bug 562977 comment 55 Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/thunderbird/+bug/1209095/comments/33 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2018-10-31T22:51:50+00:00 Acelists wrote: Progressmeters were replaced with a different implementation (no longer XUL). Can you please retest on trunk (TB65) ? Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/thunderbird/+bug/1209095/comments/34 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2018-11-01T17:12:41+00:00 toralf wrote: I'd say, this is solved with current version 60.2.1 Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/thunderbird/+bug/1209095/comments/35 ** Changed in: thunderbird Status: Unknown => Invalid ** Changed in: thunderbird Importance: Unknown => Medium -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1209095 Title: Thunderbird hogs CPU while waiting for master password To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/thunderbird/+bug/1209095/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
