Hi,
On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 04:31:13PM +0800, yalin wang wrote:
>
> i only submit the bit reverse patch for arm / arm64 arch,
yes, saw later git blaming it on you :)
> > Not for this case, but once measured on ARM, iirc, a 32-bit asm bit
> > reversal as compared to doing it in C was taking 1 cy
> On Aug 22, 2015, at 15:53, Afzal Mohammed wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 11:01:41AM +0300, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
>
Possibly the patches are still good for x86 also, but that needs to be
proven.
>>> not exactly, because x86_64 don’t have hardware instruction to do
Hi,
On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 11:01:41AM +0300, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
> >> Possibly the patches are still good for x86 also, but that needs to be
> >> proven.
> >>
> > not exactly, because x86_64 don’t have hardware instruction to do rbit OP,
> > i compile by test :
>
> For old drivers i386 may be
On 21/08/15 10:46, yalin wang wrote:
>>> i investigate on arm64 platforms:
>>
>> Ok. So is any arm64 platform actually using these devices? If these
>> devices are mostly used by 32bit x86 platforms, optimizing them for
>> arm64 doesn't make any sense.
>>
>> Possibly the patches are still good f
> On Aug 21, 2015, at 14:41, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
>
>
>
> On 20/08/15 14:30, yalin wang wrote:
>>
>>> On Aug 20, 2015, at 19:02, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 10/08/15 13:12, yalin wang wrote:
This change to use swab32(bitrev32()) to implement reverse_order()
function, ha
On 20/08/15 14:30, yalin wang wrote:
>
>> On Aug 20, 2015, at 19:02, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 10/08/15 13:12, yalin wang wrote:
>>> This change to use swab32(bitrev32()) to implement reverse_order()
>>> function, have better performance on some platforms.
>>
>> Which platforms? Presumi
> On Aug 20, 2015, at 19:02, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
>
>
> On 10/08/15 13:12, yalin wang wrote:
>> This change to use swab32(bitrev32()) to implement reverse_order()
>> function, have better performance on some platforms.
>
> Which platforms? Presuming you tested this, roughly how much better
>
On 10/08/15 13:12, yalin wang wrote:
> This change to use swab32(bitrev32()) to implement reverse_order()
> function, have better performance on some platforms.
Which platforms? Presuming you tested this, roughly how much better
performance? If you didn't, how do you know it's faster?
> Signed-o
This change to use swab32(bitrev32()) to implement reverse_order()
function, have better performance on some platforms.
Signed-off-by: yalin wang
---
drivers/video/fbdev/riva/fbdev.c | 19 ++-
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/video/fbdev/riva
9 matches
Mail list logo
