Optimize DVBStreamHandler::UpdateFiltersFromStreamData()

[Rune Petersen <rune@…>]

The current UpdateFiltersFromStreamData() figures out what pids have changed(added/removed) by comparing two maps. This is a needlessly expensive way of doing it considering it is called quite often by RunTS().

The managing of pid changes could be done better/cheaper by the MPEGStreamData class since it is it already manages the pids, and know when they change.

I have attached a PoC patch that reduces CPU usage of the backend by 20-30% - (active EIT and no frontend) this is on a Geode system. On a faster system this may very well be insignificant.

The patch will change the functionality slightly if a pid is removed and added again in MPEGStreamData.

Current behavior:

UpdateFiltersFromStreamData() will make no change

The PoC patch:

UpdateFiltersFromStreamData() will close the filter, and then reopen it.

[Rune Petersen <rune@…>]

I just realized that my patch breaks multiple sinks(MPEGStreamData derived classes) with overlapping pids - this can of cause be resolved using ref-counting.

So the question is: will you accept a patch along the lines the PoC patch? (not necessarily for 0.23-fixes)

[Rune Petersen <rune@…>]

fully functional Poc for DVB (other sources are broken)

[Rune Petersen <rune@…>]

I have attached a new PoC patch that is fully functional on DVB. (the patch also contains initial work of joining all the pidmaps into a single pidmap)

Wen I look at the changes needed it is clear it will never get into 0.23-fixes, but what about trunk?

[robertm]

Rune,

I don't see this ever being applied unless it is out of the proof of concept stage. Are you willing to/able provide a patch which leaves all recorders functional? If not, I don't think we can do anything with this ticket without someone willing to do the work themselves.

[rune@…]

The description is badly worded (my specialty).

I do intend to do the work, I just don't like wasting time on a patch if "you" aren't interested

From one of my comments:

"So the question is: will you accept a patch along the lines the PoC patch? (not necessarily for 0.23-fixes)"

I will be rebasing my patches in the near future, so If "you" are interested I'll see about cleaning it up when I rebase.

And if I could get some constructive critique on the PoC I would be grateful

[robertm]

Closing this ticket, please feel free to open a new one if you decide to do the work, I don't think anyone can answer whether a theoretical patch will be accepted.