performance work

[Greg Smith]

Forwarding this to devel.

Any comments or suggestions on how we can start to optimize graphics 
performance is appreciated.

It looks like we have a good test bed in place which should help us 
focus on the right bottlenecks.

Thanks,

Greg S

Greg Smith wrote:
> Hi Neil,
> 
> That's great data, thanks!
> 
> 
> I put these links here for tracking: 
> http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Feature_roadmap/General_UI_sluggishness
> 
> John,
> 
> Do you have further suggestions on what bottle necks this points to? 
> What part of the code should be optimized to improve the graphics 
> performance based on these results and what do you think Neil's next 
> steps should be?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Greg S
> 
> Neil Graham wrote:
>> On Tue, 2008-12-09 at 15:43 -0500, Greg Smith wrote:
>>
>>> Three ideas on how you can help.
>>>
>>> 1 - There is a recent thread on SVG performance. See: 
>>> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/sugar-devel/2008-December/010200.html
>>>
>>> You may find something there you can contribute to.
>>>
>>> 2 - I also get the impression we do need to work on the Cairo front. 
>>> If you can list a set of bugs, we can flag them as useful for 9.1 and 
>>> track them.
>>
>> Well To start off with I compiled the cairo benchmarks and ran them on
>> my slowest PC (2Ghz) and the XO  (from a basic startx )
>>
>> http://screamingduck.com/Cruft/cairo_benchmark_XO.txt
>> http://screamingduck.com/Cruft/cairo_benchmark_2GHz_E2180.txt
>>
>>
>> At least this gives me some base data to work with.  Some of the tests
>> on the XO have some eyebrow raising results, such as...
>>
>> downsample-nearest
>> Testing 512x512-lenna...
>>     0: 851892 (1.98 ms)
>>     1: 855671 (1.99 ms)
>>     2: 905907 (2.10 ms)
>>     3: 862388 (2.00 ms)
>>     4: 852743 (1.98 ms)
>>
>> downsample-nearest-xlib
>> Testing 512x512-lenna...
>>     0: 10102252 (23.44 ms)
>>     1: 33629542 (78.02 ms)
>>     2: 33715350 (78.22 ms)
>>     3: 34031523 (78.96 ms)
>>
>>
>>
>