Hi Xiyuan,

I have been forwarded the email to you directly.


Regards,
Min Chen

 2020-03-18 09:38:18,"Xiyuan Wang" <wangxiyuan1...@gmail.com> 

Hi chen
   we didn't receive your reply about Part-1, can you resend it? Maybe the 
content is too large and the mail list blocked it. You can just quote the code 
where you have questions.


Thanks.


chen <chenm...@163.com> 于2020年3月18日周三 上午9:07写道:









On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 2:59 PM Suyimeng <yimeng...@huawei.com> wrote:


 

From: x265-devel [mailto:x265-devel-boun...@videolan.org] On Behalf Of Gopi 
Satykrishna Akisetty
Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2020 4:53 PM
To: Development for x265 <x265-devel@videolan.org>
Subject: Re: [x265] [PATCH] Add aarch64 support - Part 2

 

diff --git a/source/common/pixel.cpp b/source/common/pixel.cpp
index 99b84449c..e4f890cd5 100644
--- a/source/common/pixel.cpp
+++ b/source/common/pixel.cpp
@@ -5,6 +5,7 @@
  *          Mandar Gurav <man...@multicorewareinc.com>
  *          Mahesh Pittala <mah...@multicorewareinc.com>
  *          Min Chen <min.c...@multicorewareinc.com>
+ *          Hongbin Liu<liuhongb...@huawei.com>
  *
  * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
  * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
@@ -265,6 +266,10 @@ int satd4(const pixel* pix1, intptr_t stride_pix1, const 
pixel* pix2, intptr_t s
 {
     int satd = 0;

+#if ENABLE_ASSEMBLY && X265_ARCH_ARM64
+    pixelcmp_t satd_4x4 = x265_pixel_satd_4x4_neon;
+#endif

is there any specific reason why the above code is added?? is this a kind of a 
temporary fix for the output mismatch between c and asm code? 

No, c and asm output is matched. Currently we only complete partial satd 
primatives. This is a workaround that improve all satd primitives with asm 
code. Maybe there is a bad code style.

If I understand correctly, you are trying to use a combination of c and asm 
code for all other kernel sizes that you have not completed asm implementation 
yet? 

Yes, you are right.

ok. If this code block is going to be removed in the future patches, where you 
will be implementing the asm for remaining satd  kernels, then this patch is 
good to be pushed.


before push the patches, I want to double check how about response for my 
review on Part-1?
I am not sure I missed these email, or my post still in pending.


_______________________________________________
x265-devel mailing list
x265-devel@videolan.org
https://mailman.videolan.org/listinfo/x265-devel
_______________________________________________
x265-devel mailing list
x265-devel@videolan.org
https://mailman.videolan.org/listinfo/x265-devel

Reply via email to