On Thu, 2014-11-20 at 18:46 +0200, Eero Tamminen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > Honestly, I think I'm okay with our usual metrics like:
> > - Increased FPS in a game or benchmark
> > - Reduced number of instructions or memory accesses in
> a shader program
> > - Reduced memory consumption
> > - Sign
Hi,
> Honestly, I think I'm okay with our usual metrics like:
> - Increased FPS in a game or benchmark
> - Reduced number of instructions or memory accesses in
a shader program
> - Reduced memory consumption
> - Significant cycle reduction in callgrind or better generated code
> (ideally if
On 11/07/2014 10:56 PM, Matt Turner wrote:
On Fri, Nov 7, 2014 at 12:31 AM, Siavash Eliasi wrote:
Being more strict about pushing and quality assurance of these kind of
patches will save hours of bisecting and hair-pulling to find the root cause
of performance degrades.
You say this as if it
Sounds okay to me, thanks!
Best regards,
Siavash Eliasi.
___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
On Fri, Nov 7, 2014 at 12:31 AM, Siavash Eliasi wrote:
> Being more strict about pushing and quality assurance of these kind of
> patches will save hours of bisecting and hair-pulling to find the root cause
> of performance degrades.
You say this as if it has happened...?
On Friday, November 07, 2014 12:01:20 PM Siavash Eliasi wrote:
> I know that this might sound troublesome but since there is no
> benchmarks done by reviewers before pushing the performance optimization
> oriented patches into master branch, I think it's as important as piglit
> tests and necess
I know that this might sound troublesome but since there is no
benchmarks done by reviewers before pushing the performance optimization
oriented patches into master branch, I think it's as important as piglit
tests and necessary to ask the patch provider for simple OpenGL micro
benchmarks trigg
