Thanks. I understand now. If asm.js in FF is supposed to be 2X slower than native and I'm seeing 5X slower, then I'm still seeing odd behavior and I'll keep looking at it. Chrome is 2X faster than native so if things are fixed to work as normal I should see 2X in both.
I'm not supposed to be making a lot of calls into asm.js. I'll check to make sure. On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 1:03 PM, Ryan Kelly <[email protected]> wrote: > On 16/04/2014 3:03 AM, Mark Hahn wrote: > >> 2x is the expected amount. > > > > Weird, I thought asm.js was optimized in firefox and it was faster. > > To be clear, I believe Alon means "2x slower than native" and not "2x > slower than chrome". > > > I'm not saying firefox is too slow to use. I can optimize things in the > > C code and calling JS. > > Have you checked that the asmjs is correctly validating under firefox? > In the web console you should see warnings messages about "Successfully > compiled asm.js code". > > One thing can cause this "chrome is faster than firefox at running > asmjs" behavior is frequent calls from normal javascript into the asmjs > module. For example, this kind of loop might well run faster under > chrome, depending on how much work each function call does: > > mod = MyASMJSModule() > > for (var i = 0; i < 10000; i++) { > mod.somefunc(); > } > > This would do 10000 independent calls into asmjs mode, which is > currently not very well optimized in Firefox. IIUC there are some bugs > in the works to improve this, but for now it's best to try to minimize > the number of times you cross the normal-js -> asm.js boundary. > > > Cheers, > > Ryan > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "emscripten-discuss" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
