On 10/26/2011 10:54 PM, Tom Gall wrote: > In prep for Linaro Connect & the Ubuntu Developers Summit next week > I've put together some performance measurements comparing libjpeg8c > and libjpeg-turbo compiled with it's libjpeg8 compatibility setting. > Quality settings of 95 and 75 are used. Image sizes used are 640x480 > and 3136x2352. > > Hardware used includes the imx53 QuickStart board by freescale and an > intel core 2 duo in my Lenovo T400. > > The results can be found here including both the raw numbers and pretty > graphs. > > https://wiki.linaro.org/TomGall/LibJpeg8 > > It is my hope that at LC/UDS we will be able to use these numbers to > convince ubuntu to reconsider it's switch to libjpeg8 and instead move > to libjpeg-turbo. The 2x-4x across the board performance improvement > story is compelling not to mention the technical side of it as well.
I doubt that Ubuntu will reconsider this for Precise, but I see that you did schedule a session for UDS/Connect [1]. It would be good, if you could provide relevant information for the session: - performance data from your wiki in a precise/12.04 environment, not just for arm, but for all supported Ubuntu architectures. Performance data from a natty environment doesn't really help. How does this compare to a libjpeg8 targeted to newer CPUs? Such a library could be used via hwcap. - A test rebuild for packages build-depending on libjpeg*-dev. Not sure if this will catch all issues, but it's a start. That should give an estimate for sourceful and sourceless changes needed, and for which packages you'll have to maintain a delta compared to Debian. Thanks, Matthias [1] https://blueprints.launchpad.net/libjpeg-turbo/+spec/linaro-gfxmm-libjpeg-turbo _______________________________________________ linaro-dev mailing list linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
