On Wed, 13 Apr 2011 18:24:36 +0100, Chris Wilson <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, 13 Apr 2011 08:59:55 -0700, Eric Anholt <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Tue, 12 Apr 2011 21:31:52 +0100, Chris Wilson <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > Replace the three nearly identical copies of the code with a single > > > function. And take advantage of the opportunity to do some > > > micro-optimisation: avoid the vmalloc if at all possible and also avoid > > > dropping the lock unless we are forced to acquire the mm semaphore. > > > > Could we get some performance numbers in patches that add code for > > performance? > > For myself, this was justified by simply refactoring the common code. > However, x11perf -aa10text on pnv: > before: 1.28 Mglyph/sec > after: 1.45 Mglyph/sec
Awesome.
pgpY0ArjhDOvT.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
