[MPlayer-dev-eng] [PATCH] use pthreads for caching

[A Mennucc]

Reimar Döffinger ha scritto:
> Hello,
> On Sat, Jan 27, 2007 at 12:56:57PM +0100, A Mennucc wrote:
>> here are my benchmarks; I copied two files from samples.mphq.hu to my
>> localhost for those
>>
>> the samples seem to show that the pthread version is faster
> 

> Using something with a higher bitrate like lossless video might
> provide more useful data.

can you suggest me a sample file?

> The benchmark values are not worth anything for this, I don't think they
> properly include the time in the cache functions.


that was not the goal of my benchmark

Rick was suggesting that
> I suspect linking to and initializing
> theads when they're not needed could active nasty locking mechanisms
> in the C library (malloc, etc.) possibly causing performance loss. 

my purpose in doing the benchmark is to test if some glibc calls may be
slower

[BTW: my opinion is that the cache code is not really relevant w.r.t.
performance... it usually just wait in the usec_sleep , or in read()ing
from the stream (if it is slow);
moreover no one of my changes does really add or remove code  in the
caching code]

so the only worry is: does threading slow down the rest of mplayer code
? (and I mean: in codecs, where it really hurts)

by looking at the VC values, the answer IMHO is no


> Huh? The "time" values show nothing conclusive (and certainly nothing
> significant)
> though I do not know if they include the time of the
> forked process.

the "real time" of the cathedral sample are usually 0.57s  in the
threaded version , and 0.54s in the forked version; whereas the VC time
are 4.65 vs 4.75 ;  so I guess that 'time' includes the time spent in
the threaded process

a.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 252 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.mplayerhq.hu/pipermail/mplayer-dev-eng/attachments/20070127/7aef1875/attachment.pgp>