On Sun, Jun 15, 2008 at 01:55:57AM +0200, Luca Barbato wrote:
> Keiji Costantini wrote:
> > Luca Barbato ha scritto:
> >> Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> >>> On Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 02:36:08AM +0200, Keiji Costantini wrote:
> >>>> - p[j] = c->vLumFilter[i];
> >>>> - p[j] = c->vChrFilter[i];
> >>> Whichever way this is done and whereever, it should be done at the
> >>> same place where lum/chrMmxFilter is initialized.
> >>> And of course both altivec & mmx should use the same array for the same
> >>> data.
> >>>
> >>> But looking again it seems these arrays are practically unused and the
> >>> code using it looks like it shouldnt use them in the first place.
> >>>
> >>> So, correct cleanup seems to be to remove vCCoeffsBank and vYCoeffsBank.
> >> The *Banks are just a copy from aligned memory to another, so just using
> >> the vLumFilter and vChrFilter directly won't cause problems.
> >>
> >> lu
> >>
> > extract from code:
> >
> > for (i=0;i<c->vLumFilterSize*c->dstH;i++) {
> > int j;
> > short *p = (short *)&c->vYCoeffsBank[i];
> > for (j=0;j<8;j++)
> > p[j] = c->vLumFilter[i];
> > }
> >
> > I see *Banks are *filters copied 8 times each...
>
> I'm an idiot =PAt least i now know why i didnt understand your earlier reply :) > > Well they could go away adding 2 vec_splats, but I'm pretty sure it > would slow things down. I'd consider this later -_- I wouldnt be so sure that the splats are slower than the cache trashing the array causes. Also if done properly (like in the mmx code) then there are rather few splats. [...] -- Michael GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB If a bugfix only changes things apparently unrelated to the bug with no further explanation, that is a good sign that the bugfix is wrong.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ FFmpeg-soc mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mplayerhq.hu/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-soc
