U++ framework
Do not panic. Ask here before giving up.

Home » Developing U++ » U++ Developers corner » SSE2 and SVO optimization (Painter, memcpy....)
Re: BufferPainter::Clear() optimization [message #53913 is a reply to message #53751] Fri, 15 May 2020 09:04 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
mirek is currently offline  mirek
Messages: 14291
Registered: November 2005
Ultimate Member
Experimenting with parallel:

#include <CtrlLib/CtrlLib.h>

using namespace Upp;

void CoFill(RGBA *t, RGBA c, int len)
{
	const int CHUNK = 1024;
	std::atomic<int> ii(0);
	CoDo([&] {
		for(;;) {
			int pos = CHUNK * ii++;
			if(pos >= len)
				break;
			Fill(t + pos, c, min(CHUNK, len - pos));
		}
	});
}

GUI_APP_MAIN
{
	Color c = Red();
	
	int len = 4000 * 2000;
	
	Buffer<RGBA> b(len);

	for(int i = 0; i < 10; i++) {
		{
			RTIMING("memsetd");
			memsetd(b, *(dword*)&(c), len);
		}
		{
			RTIMING("Fill");
			Fill(b, c, len);
		}
		{
			RTIMING("CoFill");
			CoFill(b, c, len);
		}
	}
}


TIMING CoFill         : 19.00 ms -  1.90 ms (19.00 ms / 10 ), min:  1.00 ms, max:  3.00 ms, nesting: 0 - 10
TIMING Fill           : 31.00 ms -  3.10 ms (31.00 ms / 10 ), min:  3.00 ms, max:  4.00 ms, nesting: 0 - 10
TIMING memsetd        : 30.00 ms -  3.00 ms (30.00 ms / 10 ), min:  2.00 ms, max:  5.00 ms, nesting: 0 - 10


To try that on different CPU, Rapsberry PI 4 numbers:

TIMING CoFill         : 145.00 ms - 14.50 ms (145.00 ms / 10 ), min: 14.00 ms, max: 15.00 ms, nesting: 0 - 10
TIMING Fill           : 225.00 ms - 22.50 ms (225.00 ms / 10 ), min: 22.00 ms, max: 24.00 ms, nesting: 0 - 10
TIMING memsetd        : 184.00 ms - 18.40 ms (184.00 ms / 10 ), min: 11.00 ms, max: 77.00 ms, nesting: 0 - 10

[Updated on: Fri, 15 May 2020 10:18]

Report message to a moderator

 
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Previous Topic: Should we still care about big-endian CPUs?
Next Topic: TheIDE crash after switching package
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Wed May 13 05:41:16 GMT+2 2026

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01550 seconds