Craig,

It would be the main config.h generated by 'configure'. It is used to
disable the routine in big-endian mode.

Vince


On Wed, 2009-03-25 at 17:39 -0600, Craig Matsuura wrote:
> Which config.h are you refering to in the armasm_memcpy.S?
> 
> 
> 
> Craig
> 
> 
> 
> On Wednesday 25 March 2009 12:55:07 pm Craig Matsuura wrote:
> > I took the new armasm memcpy patch and applied it to my
> DirectFB-1.1.1 and
> > ran it on my davinci based system using gcc-3.4 and real libc. And
> it is
> > now faster than the libc. Nice job, the original patch actually
> slowed
> > things down.
> >
> > Thank,
> > Craig
> >
> > On Wednesday 25 March 2009 2:50:35 am vince wrote:
> > > Niels,
> > >
> > > Here is a new version of the patch with the second version of
> memcpy and
> > > a conditional to remove big-endian.
> > >
> > > Let me know if you have any trouble with it.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > > Vince
> > >
> > > On Tue, 2009-03-24 at 16:36 +0100, Niels Roest wrote:
> > > > Hi John,
> > > > thanks for the comments,
> > > > just want to mention 1 or 2 things too.
> > > >
> > > > The testing routines do have a single cold, unmeasured, run
> first to
> > > > rule out previous cache state influence.
> > > >
> > > > The test itself is in fact really simple - a continuous copy of
> a large
> > > > region. So no repeats. This does focus on the use case that is
> most
> > > > obvious for DirectFB, namely copying chunks and lines of
> graphics
> > > > between surfaces, which will normally lead to cache misses
> anyway. I am
> > > > most concerned about alignment, since this is really
> unpredictable.
> > > >
> > > > I am not sure if we will benefit much from shuffling the code or
> using
> > > > different memory regions; you have to remember that the testing
> > > > routines produce a single score only, so these will need to be
> fine
> > > > tuned a lot, and we may even need to revert to multiple memcpy
> routines
> > > > which are optimised for multiple use cases. This might be an
> > > > interesting approach, it is one I will follow if performance
> > > > measurements show that we can expect a proper benefit from this
> -
> > > > forgetting that DirectFB is mainly about hardware acceleration
> anyway.
> > > >
> > > > For me I am very happy with the changes that Vince made, thanks
> Vince,
> > > > and if I have a BE/LE lock, I will include the patch.
> > > >
> > > > Greets
> > > > Niels
> > > >
> > > > John Williams wrote:
> > > > > Hi Vince,
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 12:57 AM, vince <vi...@bluush.com>
> wrote:
> > > > >> Ive change my benchmark to invalidate the cache before every
> test.
> > > > >> My result are the same. Attached is my test program.
> > > > >
> > > > > No worries - just wanted to make sure we weren't missing the
> obvious!
> > > > >
> > > > > Might also be worth shuffling the sequencing of the tests
> (armasm,
> > > > > armasm2, libc), see if that has any impact. I'm not intimate
> with
> > > > > ARM cache details, but with a write-back cache you could be
> stalling
> > > > > on cacheline evictions later in the test.
> > > > >
> > > > > Another safety would be to perform the tests in different
> memory
> > > > > regions, with a complete cache flush and invalidate between
> each run.
> > > > >
> > > > > Not saying there's anything wrong with your code, just know
> its easy
> > > > > to get false results from simple benchmark code. Memory tests
> are
> > > > > another one where the obvious approach is often wrong.
> > > > >
> > > > > Cheers,
> > > > >
> > > > > John
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > directfb-dev mailing list
> > > > > directfb-dev@directfb.org
> > > > > http://mail.directfb.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/directfb-dev
> 
> -- 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ______________________________________________________________________
> 
> 
> Craig Matsuura - Principal Engineer
> 
> Control4
> 11734 South Election Road - Suite 200
> Salt Lake City, UT 84020-6432
> PH: 801-523-3161
> FX: 801-523-3199
> 


_______________________________________________
directfb-dev mailing list
directfb-dev@directfb.org
http://mail.directfb.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/directfb-dev

Reply via email to