On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 3:08 PM, Adam Langley <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 3:00 PM, Marc-Andre Decoste <[email protected]> > wrote: > > That would be awsome... > > I just uploaded the patch here: > > http://codereview.chromium.org/108040 > > At a high level, you're using one TransportDIB per rectangle, but it > should be one per message (with multiple rects worth of image data > inside). You can't really use any benchmarking results while this is > the case. > > I agree. We should only require a single TransportDIB. It is conceptually just an array of pixels, so you should be able to append to that array with all of the new pixels and keep track of the offsets for each sub-bitmap. I believe that it is a good idea to change the code to not do smallest bounding box (for reasons beyond just the issue of the resize corner), but from our previous conversations, I'm still surprised that it would explain the performance impact here. I haven't studied this entire email thread though since it is quite large. -Darin --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Chromium Developers mailing list: [email protected] View archives, change email options, or unsubscribe: http://groups.google.com/group/chromium-dev -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
