Rockbox mail archiveSubject: Re: Skin buffer size
Re: Skin buffer size
From: Edgar Toernig <froese_at_gmx.de>
Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2010 02:28:57 +0200
Jonathan Gordon wrote:
> > -#define SKIN_BUFFER_SIZE (MAIN_BUFFER + REMOTE_BUFFER + SKIN_FONT_SIZE) + \
> > +#define SKIN_BUFFER_SIZE (MAIN_BUFFER + REMOTE_BUFFER + 5*SKIN_FONT_SIZE) + \
> > (WPS_MAX_TOKENS * sizeof(struct wps_token))
> The eventual goal is to make that buffer resizeable, but untill then
> doing that change is a waste for most people. (On the clip the font
> size is 3K IIRC but on targets with I tihnk more than 8MB ram it is
> 10K and the extra space isnt usually needed anyway.
Hmm... we are talking about ~0.1% of memory (from 12k to 24k). I think,
most people will give up 1s of sound pre-buffering for fancier graphics.
There must have been a demand else support for multiple fonts wouldn't
have been added in the first place.
But what's the point for multiple fonts when there's not enough buffer
space for them? To me it looks like the buffer size calculation was simply
not adjusted when multiple font support was added. Now you have the effect
that a WPS sometimes loads and sometimes not, depending on SBS and selected
Why not increase it until the resizable (or configurable) buffer size is
implemented? This would at least fix a problem ...
Received on 2010-07-16