On 16/01/17 21:36, Adam Jackson wrote:
On Fri, 2017-01-13 at 15:07 +0100, Pierre Ossman wrote:
I'll answer myself here...
This seems to be a CPU cache issue. Below this limit I see:
4,469,985 cache-misses:u#0.336 % of all cache refs
35,279,259,258 instru
On Fri, 2017-01-13 at 15:07 +0100, Pierre Ossman wrote:
> I'll answer myself here...
>
> This seems to be a CPU cache issue. Below this limit I see:
>
> 4,469,985 cache-misses:u#0.336 % of all cache
> refs
> 35,279,259,258 instructions:u#
On 12/01/17 13:53, Pierre Ossman wrote:
>
> For small updates I see performance growing logarithmically, measured in
> pixels/second. At around 500k pixels it starts leveling off at ~1.5
> Gpixels/second. After that the performance starts dropping linearly as
> the update grows.
I'll answer mysel
