On Fri, 2006-08-11 at 10:24 +0300, Jorn Baayen wrote:
> > Done: http://www.o-hand.com/~jorn/pango-benchmarks/210-softfloat/
Wow - nice :-)
> Now if we look at the cairo profile here (cairo.txt), we see that 7.7%
> and 3.8% are you used by __muldf3() and __adddf3(), respectively. These
> are softfloat functions, confirming suspicions that FP is a problem.
Sure - but we can (I hope) also see that a chunk of these come from a
small number of code paths, and (possibly) we can optimise that.
The burn in:
12 5.0420 libcairo.so.2.9.0 _cairo_pattern_transform
28 11.7647 libcairo.so.2.9.0 _cairo_color_init_rgba
152 63.8655 libcairo.so.2.9.0 cairo_matrix_transform_point
372 7.6559 libcairo.so.2.9.0 __muldf3
Seems to have some lying stack pieces ;-) but presumably the muls are
from either the (inlined) cairo_matrix_transform_distance, or from
cairo_matrix_multiply ?
Is the common case of that a multiplication by a unit matrix, [ ie. a
no-op ;-] that could be elided if that's detectable / propagate-able ?
[ though it seems there is no space in 'matrix' to ram an 'unsigned int
is-unit : 1' into ;-) Or is it perhaps a simple scaling [ reduce by 2x
the muls ? ].
Anyhow - it's wonderful to see a clearer profile; though the numbers
are slightly confusing - is it the case that the pango_cairo_fc_ stuff
is burning way more emulated fpu ?
Regards,
Michael.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <><, Pseudo Engineer, itinerant idiot
_______________________________________________
Performance-list mailing list
Performance-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/performance-list
