On Sat, Nov 28, 2015 at 8:48 AM, Ronald S. Bultje wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Sat, Nov 28, 2015 at 12:46 AM, Ganesh Ajjanagadde
> wrote:
>>
>> I personally consider this net ~ 10x and overall perf numbers sufficient
>> for using dynamic initialization all the
On Sat, Nov 28, 2015 at 7:27 AM, Ganesh Ajjanagadde wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 28, 2015 at 4:41 AM, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
>> On Sat, Nov 28, 2015 at 12:46:31AM -0500, Ganesh Ajjanagadde wrote:
>>> This further speeds up runtime initialization, with identical
Hi,
On Sat, Nov 28, 2015 at 12:46 AM, Ganesh Ajjanagadde wrote:
> I personally consider this net ~ 10x and overall perf numbers sufficient
> for using dynamic initialization all the time here, especially since the
> tables are large.
This is a logical fallacy. By this
On Sat, Nov 28, 2015 at 12:46:31AM -0500, Ganesh Ajjanagadde wrote:
> This further speeds up runtime initialization, with identical generated
> tables.
>
> Sample benchmark (x86-64, Haswell, GNU/Linux):
>
> old:
> 34441423 decicycles in mpegaudio_tableinit,8192 runs, 0 skips
>
> new:
On Sat, Nov 28, 2015 at 4:41 AM, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 28, 2015 at 12:46:31AM -0500, Ganesh Ajjanagadde wrote:
>> This further speeds up runtime initialization, with identical generated
>> tables.
>>
>> Sample benchmark (x86-64, Haswell, GNU/Linux):
>>
>>
This further speeds up runtime initialization, with identical generated tables.
Sample benchmark (x86-64, Haswell, GNU/Linux):
old:
34441423 decicycles in mpegaudio_tableinit,8192 runs, 0 skips
new:
10776291 decicycles in mpegaudio_tableinit,8192 runs, 0 skips
Most low