From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from ffbox0-bg.mplayerhq.hu (ffbox0-bg.ffmpeg.org [79.124.17.100]) by master.gitmailbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0CD57404DB for ; Fri, 25 Mar 2022 19:49:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.1.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ffbox0-bg.mplayerhq.hu (Postfix) with ESMTP id E905868B204; Fri, 25 Mar 2022 21:49:29 +0200 (EET) Received: from mail8.parnet.fi (mail8.parnet.fi [77.234.108.134]) by ffbox0-bg.mplayerhq.hu (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 724746809C4 for ; Fri, 25 Mar 2022 21:49:23 +0200 (EET) Received: from mail9.parnet.fi (mail9.parnet.fi [77.234.108.21]) by mail8.parnet.fi with ESMTP id 22PJnMRE008487-22PJnMRF008487 for ; Fri, 25 Mar 2022 21:49:22 +0200 Received: from foo.martin.st (host-97-187.parnet.fi [77.234.97.187]) by mail9.parnet.fi (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2AEB1A143A for ; Fri, 25 Mar 2022 21:49:21 +0200 (EET) Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2022 21:49:20 +0200 (EET) From: =?ISO-8859-15?Q?Martin_Storsj=F6?= To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <24f1e01f-de12-7180-4353-949760753c4d@martin.st> References: <20220317185819.466470-1-bavison@riscosopen.org> <20220325185257.513933-1-bavison@riscosopen.org> <20220325185257.513933-7-bavison@riscosopen.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-FE-Policy-ID: 3:14:2:SYSTEM Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH 06/10] avcodec/vc1: Arm 32-bit NEON deblocking filter fast paths X-BeenThere: ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: FFmpeg development discussions and patches List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Errors-To: ffmpeg-devel-bounces@ffmpeg.org Sender: "ffmpeg-devel" Archived-At: List-Archive: List-Post: On Fri, 25 Mar 2022, Lynne wrote: > 25 Mar 2022, 19:52 by bavison@riscosopen.org: > >> +@ VC-1 in-loop deblocking filter for 4 pixel pairs at boundary of vertically-neighbouring blocks >> +@ On entry: >> +@ r0 -> top-left pel of lower block >> +@ r1 = row stride, bytes >> +@ r2 = PQUANT bitstream parameter >> +function ff_vc1_v_loop_filter4_neon, export=1 >> + sub r3, r0, r1, lsl #2 >> + vldr d0, .Lcoeffs >> + vld1.32 {d1[0]}, [r0], r1 @ P5 >> + vld1.32 {d2[0]}, [r3], r1 @ P1 >> + vld1.32 {d3[0]}, [r3], r1 @ P2 >> + vld1.32 {d4[0]}, [r0], r1 @ P6 >> + vld1.32 {d5[0]}, [r3], r1 @ P3 >> + vld1.32 {d6[0]}, [r0], r1 @ P7 >> + vld1.32 {d7[0]}, [r3] @ P4 >> + vld1.32 {d16[0]}, [r0] @ P8 >> > > Nice patches, but 2 notes so far: Indeed, the first glance seems great so far, I haven't applied and poked them closer yet. > What's with the weird comment syntax used only in this commit? In 32 bit arm assembly, @ is a native assembler comment character, and lots of our existing 32 bit assembly uses that so far. > Different indentation style used. We try to indent our Arm assembly to: > <8 spaces>. Hmm, I haven't applied this patch locally and checked yet, but at least from browsing just the patch, it seems to be quite correctly indented? We already discussed this in the previous iteration of his patchset, and the cover letter mentioned that he had fixed it to match the convention now. (And even in the previous iteration, the 32 bit assembly matched the existing code.) // Martin _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email ffmpeg-devel-request@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".