Re: [Linux-fbdev-devel] Re: FBdev updates.

[Antonino D. <ad...@po...>]

On Tue, 2003-03-04 at 04:35, Petr Vandrovec wrote:

>   My main concern now is 12x22 font... Accelerator setup
> is so costly for each separate painted character that for 8bpp 
> accelerated version is even slower than unaccelerated one :-(
> (and almost twice as slow when compared with 2.4.x).

I submitted a patch to James, which he already applied to his tree, that
addresses this problem.  It conglomerates the series of bitmaps into 1,
so only one fb_imageblit is necessary.  It should give faster painting
than the original 2.5.x code, hopefully faster than 2.4.x code, but
slower than 8x16 painting because of the additional packing.

> 
>   And one (or two...) generic questions: why is not pseudo_palette
> u32* pseudo_palette, or even directly u32 pseudo_palette[17] ?

Yes, all drivers should treat the pseudo_palette as u32* anyway, so why
not change pseudo-palette from void* to u32*?

> And why we do not fill this pseudo_palette with
> i * 0x01010101U for 8bpp pseudocolor and i * 0x11111111U for 4bpp
> pseudocolor? This allowed me to remove couple of switches and tests
> from acceleration fastpaths (and from cfb_imageblit and cfb_fillrect,
> but I did not changed these two in my benchmarks below).

I also agree for a different reason.  Cards with unconventional formats
(such as monochrome at 8 bpp - 0 for black , 0xff for white) will not
work with the current code.

Tony