On 03/26/2013 10:51 PM Matt Turner wrote:
On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 2:44 PM, Bengt Richterb...@oz.net wrote:
uint32_t
component_delta2(uint32_t next, uint32_t prev)
{
return next0xff00ff)-(prev0xff00ff)+0x100)0xff00ff)+
(((next0xff00)-(prev0xff00))0xff00));
}
Does removing
On Tue, 26 Mar 2013 03:30:58 +0100
Rune Kjær Svendsen runesv...@gmail.com wrote:
Marek, do you have an idea on where the currency bottleneck is?
I just did a profiling with sysprof, zooming in on the desktop in Weston
and moving the mouse wildly around, so that the buffer is completely
On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 2:44 PM, Bengt Richter b...@oz.net wrote:
uint32_t
component_delta2(uint32_t next, uint32_t prev)
{
return next0xff00ff)-(prev0xff00ff)+0x100)0xff00ff)+
(((next0xff00)-(prev0xff00))0xff00));
}
Does removing all the spaces make it faster? ;)
I recommend using OpenMP for this kind of pixel processing,
specifically the parallel for. It's pretty easy to use and you could
do wonders with it, i.e. taking advantage of all CPU cores on *any*
system. You could also offload the whole thing to another thread and
continue there.
Marek
On Tue,
Marek, do you have an idea on where the currency bottleneck is?
I just did a profiling with sysprof, zooming in on the desktop in Weston
and moving the mouse wildly around, so that the buffer is completely
changed for every frame. I got around 5 fps, which isn't *that* much, but
still an order of
Hello list
I'm having problems recording the desktop content using the Weston
compositor's built-in recording function. When I start a recording and do
something that changes a lot of screen content (like zooming in on the
desktop, for example), I get around 0.5 FPS. Using sysprof, I can see that
2013/3/17 Rune Kjær Svendsen runesv...@gmail.com:
Hello list
I'm having problems recording the desktop content using the Weston
compositor's built-in recording function. When I start a recording and do
something that changes a lot of screen content (like zooming in on the
desktop, for
Thank you very much! This is much better. It's gone from 0.5-ish FPS when
zooming in to around 10 FPS, depending on screen content.
So I figure this isn't a bug? I assumed it was a bug, but is the case
simply that an efficient glReadPixels path for radeon/gallium doesn't exist?
The patch set
Slowness is not usually a bug.
I guess it can be optimized even more. It depends on where the
bottleneck is now.
Marek
On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 10:14 PM, Rune Kjær Svendsen
runesv...@gmail.com wrote:
Thank you very much! This is much better. It's gone from 0.5-ish FPS when
zooming in to around
