|
Rockbox mail archiveSubject: Re: Optimized bitswapRe: Optimized bitswap
From: Linus Nielsen Feltzing <linus_at_haxx.se>
Date: Sun, 18 Aug 2002 22:18:11 +0200 On Sun, 18 Aug 2002 22:10:37 +0200, Magnus Holmgren wrote: > How much? Player: 12MHz, Recorder: 11.0592MHz > Yes, playback is fine. No other problems noticed (but I haven't > tested *that* much yet). It shows best when playing high-bitrate songs, since the bitswap pretty much determines the watermark level. > And maybe word fetches are faster than byte fetches? E.g., aren't > there architectures that always fetches e.g. longs, even for byte > accesses? All accesses take the same time, bytes, words, longwords. However, your loop would probably (if GCC delivers) read a word of MP3 data and keep it in a register for the two table lookups. I based my "calculations" on that assumption. > Are there any L1 caches that could keep (much of) the table in > memory? No caches, unfortunately. /Linus -- Linus Nielsen Feltzing, linus_at_haxx.se on 2002-08-18Received on 2002-08-18 Page template was last modified "Tue Sep 7 00:00:02 2021" The Rockbox Crew -- Privacy Policy |