Some notes on optimization work in progress (was: Re: [cairo] WinXp benchmarks)

[Soeren Sandmann]

Carl Worth <cworth at cworth.org> writes:

> Since the oprofile numbers are not totals, some of the numbers make
> sense, (eg. oprofile's 11% from IcCombineOverU can believably be part
> of the 23% total of pixman_composite). But other things don't make
> sense, (eg. summing can't make the 32% from fbRasterizeEdges8 go down
> to 16%).

I'd guess the pixman_composite() will pretty much disappear from the
profile (at least until other stuff gets optimized) if we get the MMX
code from Xorg ported to libpixman.

At least my experience from Xorg is that CompositeGeneral() is many
many times slower than the MMX code paths, especially when compositing
in system memory.


Søren