Mention x11perf as the source for the performance measurements

[cworth.org] / src / exa / mozilla_i965_profiles.mdwn

diff --git a/src/exa/mozilla_i965_profiles.mdwn b/src/exa/mozilla_i965_profiles.mdwn
index ed166c57c9102e2d5caf28f33a305b615e3fc2e9..0c4b220bdf422349b3bba4cb70dc69b0d07fa372 100644 (file)
--- a/src/exa/mozilla_i965_profiles.mdwn
+++ b/src/exa/mozilla_i965_profiles.mdwn
@@ -82,7 +82,7 @@ reason?
 And here with EXA we see some good, and some really bad. The good news
 is that the pixman functions doing software compositing have
 disappeared from the top of the profile, leaving only software
-rasterization. But what's with this new i965_prepare_composite
+rasterization. But what's with this new `i965_prepare_composite`
 function that's taking even more time than all of libxul? That seems
 like rather excessive overhead.
 
@@ -92,3 +92,9 @@ A quick glimpse at the
 assignment statements, and then a "long sequence of commands needed to
 set up the 3D rendering pipe". Is any of that setup redundant and
 could it be easily eliminated?
+
+I noticed two calls to i830WaitSync which seemed to have "slowdown"
+written all over them. But I ran with these two calls removed and
+didn't notice any change in the performance, (and if they were causing
+a problem, shouldn't they have shown up separately in the profile
+anyway?).