Matt Turner <matts...@gmail.com> writes:
>> +pixman_bool_t
>> +_pixman_lookup_composite_function (pixman_implementation_t *toplevel,
>> + pixman_op_t op,
>> + pixman_format_code_t src_format,
>> + uint32_t src_flags,
>> + pixman_format_code_t mask_format,
>> + uint32_t mask_flags,
>> + pixman_format_code_t dest_format,
>> + uint32_t dest_flags,
>> + pixman_implementation_t **out_imp,
>> + pixman_composite_func_t *out_func);
>> +
This declaration is the result of a mismerge. I'll remove it before comitting.
>> +void
>> +pixman_expand_to_float (argb_t *dst,
>> + const uint32_t *src,
>> + pixman_format_code_t format,
>> + int width)
>> +{
>> +void
>> +pixman_contract_from_float (uint32_t *dst,
>> + const argb_t *src,
>> + int width)
>> +{
>
> As I'm sure you know, these functions can be done with SSE 2 or 4.1 if
> we could convert 4 pixels at once. How can we override their
> implementations with optimized ones?
A way to do that might be to make it a new entry point in the
implementation struct, and then make sure that the implementation
pointer is passed down to the accessors.
But a simpler approach would probably be to write SIMD iterators for the
most common formats that would convert to and from floating point
without using these expand/contract functions.
An idea here might be to change the "untransformed" iterators such that
they could take an accessor function as a parameter. Then the SIMD
implementations could simply write accessor functions and pass them to
that iterator.
Søren
_______________________________________________
Pixman mailing list
Pixman@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/pixman
