Rockbox mail archiveSubject: Re: HWCODEC
From: Boris Gjenero <boris.gjenero_at_gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2011 11:48:36 -0500
On 15/12/11 05:07 AM, Frank Gevaerts wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 10:13:06AM +0100, Amaury Pouly wrote:
>> I do not quite agree. Apart from the slow rising bin size here and there,
>> the big steps were caused by functionality useless on HWCODEC mostly (UI,
>> corealloc, others ?) and it will continue this way. We don't want to stop
>> progress because some target doesn't have enough memory.
> Why are these useless on HWCODEC?
I don't think corealloc is useless for HWCODEC. It helps reduce memory
wasted by unused features, without requiring "reboot to enable". I can
only think of one place where it might not be a good idea: the tiny WPS
images. Overhead probably makes allocating those individually not
helpful. (BTW. Even more savings is possible with the database and
I can't think of any truly useless UI features. All I can say is that if
forced to choose between RomBox and new UI features, I would choose RomBox.
> Also, memory really isn't the decider. The clip and especially the c200v2
> have exactly the same memory constraints.
For now, there's still plenty of space left in the buffer. Spinning up
the hard drive more often is much worse than reading from flash storage
Received on 2011-12-15