On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 01:57:34PM +0200, Alexandra Hájková wrote:
> >> +#define randomize_buffers(buf, size)            \
> >> +    do {                                        \
> >> +        int j;                                  \
> >> +        for (j = 0; j < size; j++) {            \
> >> +            int16_t r = rnd();                  \
> >> +            AV_WN16A(buf + j, r >> 3);          \
> >> +        }                                       \
> >> +    } while (0)
> >
> > We should stop duplicating these between checkasm modules some day.
> > You're welcome to help me refactor.
> 
> As Martin already pointed out, all the ramdomize buffers are slightly
> different for all of hevc tests

Some are, but some others are exact copies.

> >> +void checkasm_check_hevc_add_res(void)
> >> +{
> >> +    int bit_depth;
> >> +
> >> +    for (bit_depth = 8; bit_depth <= 10; bit_depth++) {
> >> +        HEVCDSPContext h;
> >> +
> >> +        ff_hevc_dsp_init(&h, bit_depth);
> >> +        check_add_res(h, bit_depth);
> >> +    }
> >
> > I didn't see you add 9-bit versions of the assembly functions, why do
> > you test 9 bits?
> >
> Because there's no 9 bit SIMD function, it's not tested but the code
> looks simpler this way.

If there is nothing to test, don't test it. Just skip over the 9-bit
test by incrementing your counter variable by 2 instead of 1.

Diego
_______________________________________________
libav-devel mailing list
libav-devel@libav.org
https://lists.libav.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-devel

Reply via email to