Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

BABL performance regression #59

Open
jonnor opened this issue Feb 17, 2016 · 4 comments
Open

BABL performance regression #59

jonnor opened this issue Feb 17, 2016 · 4 comments

Comments

@jonnor
Copy link
Member

jonnor commented Feb 17, 2016

Old

babl edc3ea3ba8509bc49368e8dd6dfd62c2619cc30e
gegl c842f4e304bc70198ea03f3803dd28aba262607

16 concurrent: [3591, 3479]
3200px:  [3963, 3774]

Current

babl d58336b72657f54952b77a13a541a7b86079931d
gegl 7ce5f3b902c0399ff4b62d2a84c57ab1ae03bc5

16 concurrent: [4912, 4481]
3200 px: [4812, 4585]

With new babl, old GEGL

babl d58336b72657f54952b77a13a541a7b86079931d
gegl c842f4e304bc70198ea03f3803dd28aba262607c

16 concurrent: [4597, 4570]
3200px: [4580, 4603]
@jonnor
Copy link
Member Author

jonnor commented Feb 17, 2016

Going to try with only new babl, keeping gegl at old version:
imgflo/imgflo-dependencies@32c624d

@jonnor
Copy link
Member Author

jonnor commented Feb 17, 2016

Seems babl changes are the main problem. Will need to bisect them locally.

@jonnor jonnor changed the title Investigate possible GEGL/BABL performance regression BABL performance regression Feb 21, 2016
@jonnor
Copy link
Member Author

jonnor commented Feb 21, 2016

Seems to be due to the changes in table-based lookups in BABL. They were just intended to be moved to own extension, but seems something is missing/broken now.
GNOME/babl@164e132
GNOME/babl@4f5d1b5

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants
@jonnor and others