[Mesa-dev] [PATCH] llvmpipe: Optimize new fs state setup

Keith Whitwell keithw at vmware.com
Thu Jun 30 09:01:51 PDT 2011

On Thu, 2011-06-30 at 17:53 +0200, Roland Scheidegger wrote:
> Am 30.06.2011 16:14, schrieb Adam Jackson:
> > On Thu, 2011-06-30 at 03:36 +0200, Roland Scheidegger wrote:
> >> Ok in fact there's a gcc bug about memcmp:
> >> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43052
> >> In short gcc's memcmp builtin is totally lame and loses to glibc's
> >> memcmp (including call overhead, no knowledge about alignment etc.) even
> >> when comparing only very few bytes (and loses BIG time for lots of bytes
> >> to compare). Oops. Well at least if the strings are the same (I'd guess
> >> if the first byte is different it's hard to beat the gcc builtin...).
> >> So this is really a gcc bug. The bug is quite old though with no fix in
> >> sight apparently so might need to think about some workaround (but just
> >> not doing the comparison doesn't look like the right idea, since
> >> apparently it would be faster with the comparison if gcc's memcmp got
> >> fixed).
> > 
> > How do things fare if you build with -fno-builtin-memcmp?
> This is even faster:
> original ipers: 12.1 fps
> ajax patch: 15.5 fps
> optimized struct compare: 16.8 fps
> -fno-builtin-memcmp: 18.1 fps
> Looks like we have a winner :-) I guess glibc optimizes the hell out of
> it (in contrast to the other results, this affected all memcmp though I
> don't know if any others benefited from that on average).
> As noted by Keith though the struct we compare is really large (over 4k)
> so trimming the size might be a good idea anyway (of course the 4k size
> also meant any call overhead and non-optimal code due to glibc not
> knowing alignment beforehand and usage of return value is completely
> insignificant).
> A 50% improvement from disabling a compiler optimization, lol.

We probably what this everywhere throughout Mesa & Gallium...


More information about the mesa-dev mailing list