On Sun, 18 Oct 2015 10:47:52 -0400 Ganesh Ajjanagadde <gajjanaga...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Commit e11e32686fdb21aded1ccf70202f1fffe87bb6a2 explains why replacing > qsort with AV_QSORT yields performance improvements. > > This replaces all existing uses of libc's qsort with AV_QSORT. > > Benchmarks deemed unnecessary due to existing claims about AV_QSORT. > Tested with FATE. > > Signed-off-by: Ganesh Ajjanagadde <gajjanaga...@gmail.com> > --- > cmdutils.c | 3 ++- > cmdutils_opencl.c | 3 ++- > ffmpeg.c | 3 ++- > libavcodec/aacsbr_template.c | 14 ++++++++------ > libavcodec/huffman.c | 3 ++- > libavcodec/motion_est_template.c | 3 ++- > libavcodec/utvideodec.c | 4 ++-- > libavcodec/utvideoenc.c | 5 +++-- > libavfilter/f_sendcmd.c | 3 ++- > libavfilter/vf_deshake.c | 3 ++- > libavfilter/vf_palettegen.c | 2 +- > libavfilter/vf_paletteuse.c | 2 +- > libavfilter/vf_removegrain.c | 7 ++++--- > libavformat/subtitles.c | 10 +++++++--- > libswresample/swresample-test.c | 3 ++- > tests/checkasm/checkasm.c | 4 ++-- > 16 files changed, 44 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-) By how much does this increase binary code size? Is it really faster? (libc qsort() could use a better algorithm, even if it has to go through indirections.) _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
