Unless you show us some hard profiling data, I don't think there's much I can do. If it's good to run Firefox and GNOME, it out to be fast enough for a mobile screen... If you don't do anything else, it's no surprise that harfbuzz is taking 95% of the time. That doesn't mean anything.
b On 11/04/10 11:34, Tom Hacohen wrote: > On Thu, 2010-11-04 at 21:56 +0630, Keith Stribley wrote: >> I assume you have implemented a Glyph Metric cache and perhaps a cmap >> lookup cache? If you are using freetype it definitely benefits from it. > > First of all, the change was when adding harfbuzz, I had a working code > before (with freetype) that was blazing fast. Checking with callgrind, I > can see that harfbuzz is what taking all the CPU time, nothing more than > that, so I don't see how the two are relevant. But yes, I have a lot of > caching with freetype, and I also somehow cache the harfbuzz results. > > After reviewing my code (well, it's not really my code) once more I > noticed that I destroy harfbuzz cache quite often, I guess that's the > issue I was experiencing, but still, I was destroying other caches as > well and harfbuzz was the biggest CPU hog by far (95% harfbuzz and 5% > the rest or something like that). > > Thanks, > Tom. > > _______________________________________________ > HarfBuzz mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/harfbuzz > _______________________________________________ HarfBuzz mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/harfbuzz
