(svn r17776) -Codechange: [SDL] make "update the video card"-process asynchronious. Profiling with gprof etc. hasn't shown us that DrawSurfaceToScreen takes a significant amount of CPU; only using TIC/TOC it became apparant that it was a heavy CPU-cycle user or that it was waiting for something.
The benefit of making this function asynchronious ranges from 2%-25% (real time) during fast forward on dual core/hyperthreading-enabled CPUs; 8bpp improvements are, in my test cases, significantly smaller than 32bpp improvements. On single core non-hyperthreading-enabled CPUs the extra locking/scheduling costs up to 1% extra realtime in fast forward. You can use -v sdl:no_threads to disable threading and undo this loss. During normal non-fast-forwarded games the benefit/costs are negligable except when the gameloop takes more than about 90% of the time of a tick. Note that allegro's performance does not improve with this system, likely due to their way of getting data to the video card. It is not implemented for the OS X/Windows video backends, unless (ofcourse) SDL is used there. Funny is that the performance of the 32bpp(-anim) blitter is, at least in some test cases, significantly faster (more than 10%) than the 8bpp(-optimized) blitter when looking at real time in fast forward on a dual core CPU; it was slower. The idea comes from a paper/report by Idar Borlaug and Knut Imar Hagen.
This commit is contained in:
@@ -23,6 +23,8 @@ class ThreadMutex_None : public ThreadMutex {
|
||||
public:
|
||||
virtual void BeginCritical() {}
|
||||
virtual void EndCritical() {}
|
||||
virtual void WaitForSignal() {}
|
||||
virtual void SendSignal() {}
|
||||
};
|
||||
|
||||
/* static */ ThreadMutex *ThreadMutex::New()
|
||||
|
Reference in New Issue
Block a user