Ian Romanick wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Chris Wilson wrote:
>> By rearranging the bitfields within the key we can reduce the size
>> of the key from 644 to 196 bytes, reducing the cost of both the
>> hashing and equality tests.
>
> How did you arrive at these num
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Chris Wilson wrote:
> By rearranging the bitfields within the key we can reduce the size
> of the key from 644 to 196 bytes, reducing the cost of both the
> hashing and equality tests.
How did you arrive at these numbers? Is that what sizeof says, or
On Wed, 2009-09-02 at 10:58 -0600, tom fogal wrote:
> writes:
> > On Wed, 2009-09-02 at 09:05 -0700, Keith Whitwell wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2009-09-02 at 08:48 -0700, Jos Fonseca wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 2009-09-02 at 05:11 -0700, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > > > > By rearranging the bitfields within the key
writes:
> On Wed, 2009-09-02 at 09:05 -0700, Keith Whitwell wrote:
> > On Wed, 2009-09-02 at 08:48 -0700, José Fonseca wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2009-09-02 at 05:11 -0700, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > > > By rearranging the bitfields within the key we can reduce the size
> > > > of the key from 644 to 196 b
On Wed, 2009-09-02 at 09:05 -0700, Keith Whitwell wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-09-02 at 08:48 -0700, José Fonseca wrote:
> > On Wed, 2009-09-02 at 05:11 -0700, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > > By rearranging the bitfields within the key we can reduce the size
> > > of the key from 644 to 196 bytes, reducing the
On Wed, 2009-09-02 at 08:48 -0700, José Fonseca wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-09-02 at 05:11 -0700, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > By rearranging the bitfields within the key we can reduce the size
> > of the key from 644 to 196 bytes, reducing the cost of both the
> > hashing and equality tests.
> > ---
> > src
On Wed, 2009-09-02 at 05:11 -0700, Chris Wilson wrote:
> By rearranging the bitfields within the key we can reduce the size
> of the key from 644 to 196 bytes, reducing the cost of both the
> hashing and equality tests.
> ---
> src/mesa/main/texenvprogram.c |7 ---
> 1 files changed, 4 ins
Well...you need 7 bits/struct, so you can just use a byte array rather than
a struct array, and then manipulate each member using macros to hide the
ugly AND/OR/shifting. Would work for C89, for that matter.
On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 9:48 AM, Roland Scheidegger wrote:
> Hmm, I'm not actually sure th
Hmm, I'm not actually sure this will always reduce the state key size. I
think the compiler is still allowed to pad the mode_opt struct out to
whatever it likes (maybe #pragma pack(1) can prevent this), even though
maybe gcc does not.
I don't like pragmas too much, but it looks the only way to do t
Unfortunately gcc (version 4.3.2 anyway) warns on this:
main/texenvprogram.c:87: warning: type of bit-field ‘Source’ is a GCC
extension
main/texenvprogram.c:88: warning: type of bit-field ‘Operand’ is a GCC
extension
I'm trying to find a #pragma or something to silence the warning...
-Brian
Ke
Looks great Chris.
Keith
On Wed, 2009-09-02 at 05:11 -0700, Chris Wilson wrote:
> By rearranging the bitfields within the key we can reduce the size
> of the key from 644 to 196 bytes, reducing the cost of both the
> hashing and equality tests.
> ---
> src/mesa/main/texenvprogram.c |7 --
By rearranging the bitfields within the key we can reduce the size
of the key from 644 to 196 bytes, reducing the cost of both the
hashing and equality tests.
---
src/mesa/main/texenvprogram.c |7 ---
1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/src/mesa/main/texenvprogra
12 matches
Mail list logo
