[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [help-GIFT] Optimizing
From: |
risc |
Subject: |
Re: [help-GIFT] Optimizing |
Date: |
Tue, 19 Sep 2006 12:10:33 -0500 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.4.1i |
On Fri, Sep 15, 2006 at 04:54:33PM -0500, address@hidden wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 10:45:50PM +0100, David Squire wrote:
> > address@hidden wrote:
> >
> > >I don't find the branch idea to be a great one, because what appears to be
> > >already happening is everyone is using their own branches, and the one in
> > >the tree, which is the one that people new to the project will use, is
> > >being left to rot. David's criticism of that optimization is valid, I'll
> > >be adding a MAX_WIDTH and MAX_HEIGHT, so that both of us are satisfied.
> > >All of my allocation changes are already in tree, and this one is the only
> > >one that we both agree was a "badly implemented idea".
> >
> > Not so fast. I still haven't read everything that happened while I was
> > walking :) I had about 500 non-spam emails to deal with when I returned...
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > David
> >
> >
> > --
> > Dr David McG. Squire, Senior Lecturer, on sabbatical in 2006
> > Caulfield School of Information Technology, Monash University, Australia
> > CRICOS Provider No. 00008C http://www.csse.monash.edu.au/~davids/
> >
>
> David,
>
> Have you had time to read the other two patches (70 and 80)?
>
> Heres a new version of patch 60, with your and johan's input.
>
> I've been dead busy for a while, so i'm just getting around to this.
>
> If you have no objections, i'd like to apply this, and patch 70 and 80
> come next tuesday. should make a big difference.
>
> (yes, memset is faster. thanks johan)
>
> Wolfgang:
>
> I'm about 5 or 6 patches from getting to re-structuring as you
> suggested. I just want to get this work in before tackling something
> else. :)
>
> Julia Longtin <address@hidden>
> --- ChangeLog 2006-09-15 20:12:43.000000000 +0000
> +++ ../../dev/gift/ChangeLog 2006-09-15 21:21:52.000000000 +0000
> @@ -1,3 +1,9 @@
> +2006-09-15 <address@hidden>
> +
> + * FeatureExtraction/gabor.c
> + dont use calloc for conv, instead declare, and clear with memset.
> + change to C99 datatypes in gabor_filter().
> +
> 2006-09-14 <address@hidden>
> * scripts/perl/gift-add-collection.pl
> Fixed a buglet in the last part of the help message, and added a
> --- ../../dev2/gift/FeatureExtraction/gabor.c 2006-08-28 17:18:09.000000000
> +0000
> +++ FeatureExtraction/gabor.c 2006-09-15 21:44:01.000000000 +0000
> @@ -2,12 +2,16 @@
> #include <stdlib.h>
> #include <malloc.h>
> #include <math.h>
> +/* for memset(), others */
> #include <string.h>
> #include <unistd.h>
> #include <ppm.h>
>
> #include "gabor.h"
>
> +/* for MAX_WIDTH and MAX_HEIGHT */
> +#include "gift_features.h"
> +
> /* for uint32_t */
> #include <stdint.h>
>
> @@ -79,15 +83,15 @@
> }
> }
>
> -void gabor_filter(double *image, int width, int height, int filter_scale,
> int orientation, double ** kernelsxy, double *output) {
> +void gabor_filter(double *image, int width, int height, int filter_scale,
> int orientation, double **kernelsxy, double *output) {
>
> - double *conv;
> - int x, y, t_x, t_y;
> - int i;
> + uint32_t x, y;
> + int32_t t_x, t_y;
> + uint32_t i;
> double * target_kernal;
> + double conv[MAX_WIDTH*MAX_HEIGHT]; /* take advantage of our fixed image
> size. */
>
> -
> - conv = (double *)calloc(width*height, sizeof(double));
> + memset(&conv, 0, MAX_WIDTH*MAX_HEIGHT*sizeof(double));
>
> target_kernal=kernelsxy[filter_scale*num_gabors_per_scale+orientation];
>
> @@ -144,5 +148,4 @@
> }
> }
>
> - free(conv);
> }
> --- FeatureExtraction/gift_features.h 2001-02-01 11:22:30.000000000 +0000
> +++ ../../dev/gift/FeatureExtraction/gift_features.h 2006-09-15
> 20:31:37.000000000 +0000
> @@ -24,4 +24,8 @@
> adapting to Wolfgang's code */
> #define WOLFGANG_HACK
>
> +/* fixed size buffer values, so that we dont code these into the .c files */
> +#define MAX_WIDTH 256
> +#define MAX_HEIGHT 256
> +
> #endif
Replying to myself, just to make sure...
David,
Do you have any objections to the patch above, or the 70* and 80* patches i
submitted last time arround?
Speak now, cause as soon as my laptop is set up, i'm commiting. :)
Julia Longtin <address@hidden>