Martin Spott wrote:
Which patch do you mean? Do you mean the patch in Leif's e-mail in this thread or the patch in his e-mail with the "[PATCH] texmem-0-0-1 branch" subject? Or do you mean something else? :)Ian, now that you've merged in the software support for combine3 from the Mesa trunk, I'm trying to get it working in hardware on R100 with texmem (impatient as I am ;) ).Where do I find at least a short explanation on the effect this patch should show to me (to the user) ? The only impression I have after a short test is decreased frame rate in FlightGear under certain conditions. I'm pretty shure this is not your primary intention with this patch ;-) So obviously this patch is considered to improve something else that FlightGear das not benefit from,
The patch in this thread should not have any impact on performance. It adds a couple of extra combine modes to the list in ARB_texture_env_combine. The patch in the other thread fixes some bugs that can lead to texture corruption when there are multiple active GL contexts. It's possible that could effect performance, but only in the case of multiple active contexts.
That would be easy enough to verify with oprofile. Just take a profile with and without the patch. In order to get profile data on the GL driver, do this:
oprofpp -l /usr/X11R6/lib/modules/dri/radeon_dri.so
Or whatever your driver is.
If more time shows up in any of the functions in lib/GL/mesa/src/drv/common/texmem.c or in the texture upload functions in the driver, then you can blame the patch. :) Either way, it would be interesting to see profiles of common apps.
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
_______________________________________________
Dri-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel
