On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 10:07:03AM +0200, Anton Khirnov wrote: > Quoting Vittorio Giovara (2016-08-24 16:58:12) > > On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 6:06 AM, Diego Biurrun <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 11:24:01AM +0200, Anton Khirnov wrote: > > >> --- /dev/null > > >> +++ b/libavutil/x86/imgutils_init.c > > >> @@ -0,0 +1,49 @@ > > >> + > > >> +void ff_image_copy_plane_uc_from_sse4(uint8_t *dst, ptrdiff_t > > >> dst_linesize, > > >> + const uint8_t *src, ptrdiff_t > > >> src_linesize, > > >> + ptrdiff_t bytewidth, int height); > > >> + > > >> +int ff_image_copy_plane_uc_from_x86(uint8_t *dst, ptrdiff_t > > >> dst_linesize, > > >> + const uint8_t *src, ptrdiff_t > > >> src_linesize, > > >> + ptrdiff_t bytewidth, int height) > > >> +{ > > >> + int cpu_flags = av_get_cpu_flags(); > > >> + ptrdiff_t bw_aligned = FFALIGN(bytewidth, 64); > > >> + > > >> + if (EXTERNAL_SSE4(cpu_flags) && > > >> + bw_aligned <= dst_linesize && bw_aligned <= src_linesize) > > >> + ff_image_copy_plane_uc_from_sse4(dst, dst_linesize, src, > > >> src_linesize, > > >> + bw_aligned, height); > > >> + else > > >> + return AVERROR(ENOSYS); > > >> + > > >> + return 0; > > >> +} > > >> --- a/libavutil/imgutils.c > > >> +++ b/libavutil/imgutils.c > > >> @@ -265,9 +266,33 @@ void av_image_copy_plane(uint8_t *dst, int > > >> dst_linesize, > > >> +static void image_copy_plane_uc_from(uint8_t *dst, ptrdiff_t > > >> dst_linesize, > > >> + const uint8_t *src, ptrdiff_t > > >> src_linesize, > > >> + ptrdiff_t bytewidth, int height) > > >> +{ > > >> + int ret = -1; > > >> + > > >> +#if ARCH_X86 > > >> + ret = ff_image_copy_plane_uc_from_x86(dst, dst_linesize, src, > > >> src_linesize, > > >> + bytewidth, height); > > >> +#endif > > >> + > > >> + if (ret < 0) > > >> + image_copy_plane(dst, dst_linesize, src, src_linesize, > > >> bytewidth, height); > > >> +} > > > > > > This feels awkward. Why not make it into some dsp-like structure with > > > overloading function pointers? > > > > +1 > > How is this more awkward than doing almost the exact same thing in the dsp > context init function? > > My first approach actually did add a new dsp context, but it turned out > that it's just a lot of extra boilerplat code for no real reason.
You need an extra ifdef, you need to check errors, it's not quite the same solution applied to a pattern we have all over the place already. Diego _______________________________________________ libav-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.libav.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-devel
