On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 6:05 AM, Cedric BAIL <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> With the last serie of patch I committed inside evas, evas_render
> should now be working again correctly. This fixed version only give
> around 7% of speedup to expedite test and some are a little bit slower
> than the previous.
>
> So after diging a little bit more the slower tests case of expedite, I
> think the attached patch will make all expedite test as fast as
> without the cache inside evas_render and give a global 10% speedup to
> expedite without any cache.
>
> The idea is to remove as much allocation and list manipulation as
> possible by implementing a special array of Evas_Rectangle. This patch
> work for me on all my application, E17 and edje old test application.
>
> So as always have fun reviewing this patch !
Looks good in general, just think we should use inverted names like
the rest of evas:
evas_add_rect -> evas_rectangles_add()
- obj->clip.changes = updates;
+ for (i = 0; i < rects->count; ++i)
+ {
+ r = malloc(sizeof(Evas_Rectangle));
+ if (!r) goto end;
+
+ *r = rects->array[i];
+ obj->clip.changes = evas_list_append(obj->clip.changes, r);
+ }
no way to avoid this? Why not change obj->clip.changes to be a pointer
to rects? This way we save this extra walk and lots of small malloc()
and overhead of lists (memory fragmentation, extra pointer for
"->data" and no evas_memorypool...)... also eliminating the need to
free the rects->array right below:
+ end:
+ free(rects->array);
+ rects->array = NULL;
+ rects->count = 0;
+ rects->total = 0;
Just remember that rects might be a pointer in the stack, if so you
need to malloc() + memcpy() it.
+ if (obj->smart.smart) return ;
+ if (is_v == was_v) return ;
why do you like this space between "return" and ";" ? :-P
+/* if (tmp.count > 0) */
+/* { */
+/* unsigned int i; */
+
+/* for (i = 0; i < tmp.count; ++i) */
+/* { */
+/* if ((tmp.array[i].w > 0) && (tmp.array[i].h > 0)) */
+/* { */
+/* int intsec1, intsec2; */
+
+/* intsec1 = (RECTS_INTERSECT(tmp.array[i].x,
tmp.array[i].y, tmp.array[i].w, tmp.array[i].h, x, y, w, h)); */
+/* intsec2 = (RECTS_INTERSECT(tmp.array[i].x,
tmp.array[i].y, tmp.array[i].w, tmp.array[i].h, xx, yy, ww, hh)); */
+/* if (intsec1 ^ intsec2) */
+/* { */
+/* evas_add_rect(rects, tmp.array[i].x, tmp.array[i].y,
tmp.array[i].w, tmp.array[i].h); */
+/* } */
+/* } */
+/* } */
+/* free(tmp.array); */
+/* } */
what's this? remove or uncomment?
+ if ((rects->count + 1) > rects->total)
+ {
+ Evas_Rectangle *_add_rect;
+ unsigned int _tmp_total;
+
+ _tmp_total = rects->total + 32;
+ _add_rect = realloc(rects->array, sizeof(Evas_Rectangle) * _tmp_total);
+ if (!_add_rect) return ;
+
+ rects->total = _tmp_total;
+ rects->array = _add_rect;
and
+ if (rects->max < (rects->active + 1))
+ {
+ rects->max += 32;
+ rects->rects = realloc(rects->rects, sizeof(Cutout_Rect) * rects->max);
+ }
"so close, yet so far...". Make them "almost the same", the second
version doesn't handle any error. also change the comparison to be
uniform.
I hope that without the need to walk the rects->array and convert it
to a list we'll have even more speed gains.
--
Gustavo Sverzut Barbieri
http://profusion.mobi embedded systems
--------------------------------------
MSN: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Skype: gsbarbieri
Mobile: +55 (19) 9225-2202
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php
_______________________________________________
enlightenment-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
