On 8/13/2012 8:31 PM, NightStrike wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 2:49 PM, Kyle <kshawk...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> It's *very* slow. If you compare the speed to that of a older FFmpeg,
>> the debug build is practically unusable.
>
> I'm coming into this very late, and I probably can't be of much help,
> but just a thought.  Have you tried profiling ffmpeg to see where it's
> wasting all of its time?  For instance, if it's seeing tons of delays
> just trying to get mutexes, then that's a problem.

Thank you for the help. Ive been forced to switch over to w32threads 
because of this issue and I'm willing to offer any help to get it fixed. 
I think winpthreads is a great package for not only FFmpeg but also 
other high cpu usage apps, and prefer it over any of the other pthread 
wrapper libraries.

With that said, I haven't tried to profile FFmpeg. I'm not sure how I 
would go about doing that either.

> Compiling with -pg and using gprof would be a help, as would throwing
> some instrumentation in the code at various key points.

I can supply a build with -pg, I haven't used gprof yet but I believe it 
works along with a build that is compiled with -pg.  I'm a bit rusty in 
C, but I'm very motivated to fix this so just walk me though anything 
you would like tested and I'll see that it's done.

> Have you used gprof before?  It can be daunting with the output that it gives.

Any progress on this bug is a huge help to me.

Best regards,
   Kyle Schwarz

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Live Security Virtual Conference
Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and 
threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions 
will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware 
threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
_______________________________________________
Mingw-w64-public mailing list
Mingw-w64-public@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mingw-w64-public

Reply via email to