Matt Turner <[email protected]> writes: > I've been trying to figure out if the ARM iwmmxt inline assembly makes > any difference at all. I think the conclusion is that it does not. > Updated code is here: > http://cgit.freedesktop.org/~mattst88/pixman/log/?h=iwmmxt-optimizations
You mean that inline assembly in mmx_fill() doesn't make a difference? > See > http://people.freedesktop.org/~mattst88/pixman-iwmmxt-benchdata.txt The lowlevel-blt benchmark doesn't hit the fill and blt routines at all, so this data doesn't support the conclusion that inline assembly in mmx_fill() and mmx_blt() makes no difference. > Never does using inline assembly seem to make any sort of meaningful > difference over simply compiling pixman-mmx.c for ARM/iwmmxt. I tried > checking the alignment in the 'wip' commit in the blt function to > avoid a lot of unnecessary walign instructions, but as you can see > from the benchmark results, it doesn't help anything. The cairo-trace tests are better benchmarks to use in general because they reflect real-world use. lowlevel-blt-bench really should only be used for the case where you are optimizing a specific compositing routine. Soren _______________________________________________ Pixman mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/pixman
