On Wed, 25 Jul 2012 15:19:23 +0200
Olivier Blin <olivier.b...@softathome.com> wrote:
> ---
> clients/gears.c | 29 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 29 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/clients/gears.c b/clients/gears.c
> index 70ec86c..19165e7 100644
> --- a/clients/gears.c
> +++ b/clients/gears.c
> @@ -59,6 +59,8 @@ struct gears {
>
> GLint gear_list[3];
> int fullscreen;
> + int frames;
> + uint32_t last_fps;
> };
>
> struct gear_template {
> @@ -203,10 +205,33 @@ make_gear(const struct gear_template *t)
> }
>
> static void
> +update_fps(struct gears *gears, uint32_t time)
> +{
> + long diff_ms;
> +
> + gears->frames++;
> +
> + diff_ms = time - gears->last_fps;
> +
> + if (diff_ms > 5000) {
> + float seconds = diff_ms / 1000.0;
> + float fps = gears->frames / seconds;
> +
> + printf("%d frames in %6.3f seconds = %6.3f FPS\n",
> gears->frames, seconds, fps);
Gears will now need the same disclaimer as glxgears has,
otherwise end users will start using this as a generic
Wayland performance benchmark. I can imagine some
headlines on Phoronix when they compare Wayland gears with
glxgears and draw wildly incorrect conclusions.
I hope you will add a message explaining what this "fps" number
really means and what it can be used for.
Thanks,
pq
_______________________________________________
wayland-devel mailing list
wayland-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/wayland-devel
