Hi Bartosz, Thanks for the patch.
On út 7. července 2009, Bartosz Zaborowski wrote: > Hi all, > > I've rewritten some code of image loader to get real performance gain from > threads on SMP machine. Threads support exist in geeqie since around rev > 1100, but in fact, there are up to 2 simultaneously running threads - main > (for GUI) and only 1 for image loader. And GUI doesn't do anything > cpu-intensive. > The patch looks good in general. Maybe you could simplify the code in view_file.c and move the code for managing multiple loaders to thumb.c. > With this patch geeqie runs a few simultaneous threads for image loaders > while it loads image for main view and makes thumbnails in main list. > Number of threads depends on MAX_THREADS constant (currently located in > main.h, but it should probably be determined in configure somehow - I'm not > familiar with automake etc). Low prio tasks (making thumbnails) runs in up > to MAX_THREADS threads. When high-prio task arrives, some of the low-prio > are stopped - so when MAX_THREADS=1 you get exactly the old behavior. > > It seems that MAX_THREADS should be set to number_of_cpus+1, with that > value I've got best performance. > Best option would be to autodetect the number of cpus in runtime. > I haven't modified the search and duplicates dialogs with their thumbnails > loading methods - maybe I'll rewrite them later (I don't understand why > there is more than 1 separate mechanism for making thumbnails?). > The long-term plan is to drop the duplicated code and use view_file.c for everything. > And I did some tests: after modification on 2core CPU I've got about 185% > of initial performance, and when MAX_THREADS=1 we get sth which is not > worse than original geeqie. > > There are also some minor modifications in file reading - I've added > madvise call to force readahead of mmaped file (with many threads its > really important) and increased a bit "read buffer" - it gives a little > performance gain for free. > > I hope somebody will enjoy my work;) > > PS. I know its not the best time to post such patch, since you are > releasing 1.0, but it's also a part of a project for my course at high > school;) PS2. I'll be offline from 9.07 to ~28.07, so I won't answer for > any comments those days. > I'd rather wait with adding the patch after 1.0, since it is a non-trivial change. Thanks, Vladimir ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Geeqie-devel mailing list Geeqie-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geeqie-devel
