On Wed, Feb 05, 2014 at 12:41:45PM +0000, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote: > From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@xxxxxxxxx> > > A simple userptr benchmark measuring creation and destruction of userptr > surfaces and also impact of having a different number of them in the > process address space. > > Example test output from i7-4550U running Android is below. > > Questions, comments and ideas are welcome. One silly idea I wanted to test was that speed of read/write access to ptr was not affected by wrapping it up in a userptr. > IGT-Version: 1.5-NOT-GIT (android-ia) (Linux: 3.10.20-g667dce8-dirty x86_64) unsync vs sync - unsync is much faster at creating userptr (not having to hook up and search the mmu-notifier) - unsync is reasonably faster for destroying userptr - there is no scaling issue with unsync, and minor (log(n)) scaling factor for sync That seems in line with our expectations of i915_gem_userptr.c, which is reassuring. -Chris -- Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
