On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 7:04 AM, Scott D Phillips
> On Sun, Oct 16, 2016 at 09:20:49PM -0700, Xiang, Haihao wrote:
>> Hi Scott,
>> Does your patches change the pass criteria? I don't see any failure
>> after applying your patches, but Common/JPEGEncodeInputTest.Full/95
>> should be failed if no change to pass criteria.
> It should not alter the pass-criteria for any test. Looking closer at the
> change, because the comparison is done with int8_t, it is possible that a
> surface of all 0 will compare as 'close enough' to a surface of all 255. Let
> me see if I
> can fix that.
Yes, I was seeing the same thing as Haihao, and was expecting the failure.
>> > For me these two patches take the Big encode test from 44sec to
>> > ~7sec.
>> > Scott D Phillips (2):
>> > test: use valarray for raw image comparison
>> > test: read jpeg test data from /dev/urandom
>> > test/i965_jpeg_encode_test.cpp | 29 +++++++++++++----------------
>> > test/i965_jpeg_test_data.cpp | 6 +++---
>> > 2 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
> Libva mailing list
Sean V. Kelley <sean.v.kel...@intel.com>
Open Source Technology Center / SSG
Libva mailing list