On 12/05/17 05:49, Eric Anholt wrote:
Marek Olšák <mar...@gmail.com> writes:
From: Marek Olšák <marek.ol...@amd.com>
Based on a benchmark from mesa/demos, but rewritten and extended.
It's a benchmark expected to be run separately, not a piglit test.
So why piglit? Because it's a good framework for writing apps like this.
mesa_glthread won't show an improvement here, because there is no app
overhead.
This is what the output looks like. The percentage is relative to
the first test of the given draw call.
The obvious thing there is that enabled vertex attribs decrease
Mesa performance even if there are no state changes.
Since nobody else has replied,
I think piglit is the wrong place for this. I agree that it's sorta
convenient, but mesa-demos or glmark2 are the right place.
I'm not totally against this. It would be nice to leverage more of the
piglit framework/tools to be able to run a group of perf tests and
generate some kind of comparison automatically. That way way we could
have an easy tools for comparing releases etc. I know Intel has an
internal setup for this type of thing, but having something in the test
suite all mesa devs use would be handy.
Anyway I've given this benchmark a run with my KHR_no_error changes and
I'm seeing a nice jump in a bunch of the tests.
The biggest jump is:
DrawArrays(16 VBOs, 0 UBOs, 0 Tex) w/ no state change: 5.41 million (49.3%)
DrawArrays(16 VBOs, 0 UBOs, 0 Tex) w/ no state change: 16.33 million
(109.1%)
But there is a general increase across the majority of tests which is
encouraging to see as I still haven't been able to measure much change
in the games I've been trying. I suspect I'll need to have coverage
across most of the api a game uses before I see much change.
_______________________________________________
Piglit mailing list
Piglit@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/piglit
