|
|
|
@ -28,16 +28,17 @@ NOTE: If you still don't understand some function, ask at our mailing list!!! |
|
|
|
|
(http://lists.mplayerhq.hu/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
What speedup justifies an optimizetion? |
|
|
|
|
--------------------------------------- |
|
|
|
|
Normaly with clean&simple optimizations and widely used codecs a overall |
|
|
|
|
speedup of the affected codec of 0.1% is enough. These speedups accumulate |
|
|
|
|
and can make a big difference after a while ... |
|
|
|
|
Also if none of the following gets worse and at least one gets better then an |
|
|
|
|
optimization is always a good idea even if the overall gain is less than 0.1% |
|
|
|
|
(speed, binary code size, source size, source readability) |
|
|
|
|
For obscure codecs noone uses, the goal is more toward keeping the code clean |
|
|
|
|
small and readable than to make it 1% faster. |
|
|
|
|
When is an optimization justified? |
|
|
|
|
---------------------------------- |
|
|
|
|
Normally, clean & simple optimizations on widely used codecs can achieve |
|
|
|
|
an overall speedup of 0.1%. These speedups accumulate and can make a big |
|
|
|
|
difference after awhile. Also, if none of the following factors get |
|
|
|
|
worse due to an optimization -- speed, binary code size, source size, |
|
|
|
|
source readability -- and at least one factor improves, then an |
|
|
|
|
optimization is always a good idea even if the overall gain is less than |
|
|
|
|
0.1%. For obscure codecs that are not often used, the goal is more |
|
|
|
|
toward keeping the code clean, small, and readable than to make it 1% |
|
|
|
|
faster. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
WTF is that function good for ....: |
|
|
|
|