Quoting Martin Storsjö (2023-12-17 22:57:50) > > FWIW, we've had these situations elsewhere before as well, in swscale, > where the existing x86 assembly mismatches the C code in nontrivial ways, > and we have new assembly (aarch64 in that case) that is missing a test > (even if one was written) due to this. > > First I considered if we should collect these extra checkasm tests in some > branch somewhere, so they aren't lost, as they are useful when working on > assembly on other architectures. > > But rather than having the code rot, forgotten in a stray branch > somewhere, I wonder if we should just go ahead and merge it with an #if > !ARCH_X86 or something, together with a notable FIXME comment. > > That would keep the test coverage for new asm implementations, avoid code > rot, and leave the opportunity to sort things out easily available for > whoever wants to dissect the old existing x86 assembly implementations. > > That's clearly not ideal, but would pragmatically be better than to just > not merge the new checkasm test at all. What do others think?
FWIW what you propose sounds good to me. -- Anton Khirnov _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email ffmpeg-devel-requ...@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".
