<html>
<head>
<base href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/">
</head>
<body><span class="vcard"><a class="email" href="mailto:eero.t.tamminen@intel.com" title="Eero Tamminen <eero.t.tamminen@intel.com>"> <span class="fn">Eero Tamminen</span></a>
</span> changed
<a class="bz_bug_link
bz_status_RESOLVED bz_closed"
title="RESOLVED FIXED - 2-3% performance drop in GpuTest v0.7 FurMark with "nir/copy_prop: Respect the source's number of components""
href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=101064">bug 101064</a>
<br>
<table border="1" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="8">
<tr>
<th>What</th>
<th>Removed</th>
<th>Added</th>
</tr>
<tr>
<td style="text-align:right;">Resolution</td>
<td>---
</td>
<td>FIXED
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td style="text-align:right;">Status</td>
<td>NEW
</td>
<td>RESOLVED
</td>
</tr></table>
<p>
<div>
<b><a class="bz_bug_link
bz_status_RESOLVED bz_closed"
title="RESOLVED FIXED - 2-3% performance drop in GpuTest v0.7 FurMark with "nir/copy_prop: Respect the source's number of components""
href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=101064#c2">Comment # 2</a>
on <a class="bz_bug_link
bz_status_RESOLVED bz_closed"
title="RESOLVED FIXED - 2-3% performance drop in GpuTest v0.7 FurMark with "nir/copy_prop: Respect the source's number of components""
href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=101064">bug 101064</a>
from <span class="vcard"><a class="email" href="mailto:eero.t.tamminen@intel.com" title="Eero Tamminen <eero.t.tamminen@intel.com>"> <span class="fn">Eero Tamminen</span></a>
</span></b>
<pre>(In reply to Eero Tamminen from <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=101064#c1">comment #1</a>)
<span class="quote">> (In reply to Eero Tamminen from <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=101064#c0">comment #0</a>)
> > This commit regressed GpuTest v0.7 FurMark performance by 2-3% on GEN9+:</span >
...
<span class="quote">> > Timothy's commits 2 months later:
> > * i965: remove GLSL IR optimisation loop
> > * nir: shuffle constants to the top
> >
> > Compensated for the FurMark drop (SynMark tests were not affected by them).
> >
> > If those commits fixed what this regressed, this bug should be closed. If
> > they improved something else, it may be better to keep this open.
>
> There has been lately further improvements to FurMark perf, so current
> performance is higher than the originally regressed one.
>
> Is the original regression still valid or should this be closed as fixed?</span >
Marking this 2017 bug as FIXED.</pre>
</div>
</p>
<hr>
<span>You are receiving this mail because:</span>
<ul>
<li>You are the assignee for the bug.</li>
<li>You are the QA Contact for the bug.</li>
</ul>
</body>
</html>