Keith Whitwell wrote: >> If this was a test of just two memory manager implementations, the >> benchmarks would speak for themselves. However, there are at least two >> driver changes I caught on first review of gallium-i915-current's >> i915simple (which I assume is what you were testing, given that the last >> tests I've heard from you guys were using that) that would have an >> impact on performance: >> > > As far as I know the gallium driver isn't involved in these tests -- > this is a comparison between the original i915tex and newer versions > of the driver. > The i915tex driver in the benchmark is the i915tex driver from the i915tex_branch of mesa. That's the original i915tex driver we released patched up for master xf86-video-intel and drm, and a slab pool to avoid the larger memory footprint that comes from the user-space batch buffer pool and the texture allocation size granularity. At this point, Gallium is not in any way involved.
/Thomas ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php -- _______________________________________________ Dri-devel mailing list Dri-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel
