From: "Martin Storsjö" <martin@martin.st> To: "Swinney, Jonathan" <jswinney@amazon.com> Cc: "J. Dekker" <jdek@itanimul.li>, "Pop, Sebastian" <spop@amazon.com>, "ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org" <ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org> Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH 0/2] checkasm: updated tests for sw_scale Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2022 23:12:42 +0300 (EEST) Message-ID: <3019b79-50b9-e449-9f3b-84858c33722c@martin.st> (raw) In-Reply-To: <7e24309d6e59492ca73651a372ef9b2b@EX13D07UWB004.ant.amazon.com> On Mon, 13 Jun 2022, Swinney, Jonathan wrote: > Here is an updated patch series for the yuv2plane[X|1] implementations > and tests. The checkasm test wasn't working at all for aarch64, and the > x86_64 behavior differs from the default implementation so I had to > include some code to specialize the test for x86_64. Please let me know > if you would like me to do that at different way. Did you consider what I suggested in the last round - making two rounds of the test, one without the bitexact flag, where it's ok to be off by one (or some other epsilon) from the C reference, and one with the bitexact flag? I would presume that the currently tested x86 routines would fall into that category of non-bitexact. That way, you'd get exact tests for implementations that claim to be that, and fuzzy tests allowing minor differences, for such implementations. That would allow testing all variants without all the current horrible ifdefs, right? > I also left in some code to print out helpful debugging messages when > the tests fail. I need them for my own work and thought they might be > useful to share, but I'm happy to remove them if you would prefer it > that way. I think it's good to keep such debug printouts in the checkasm tests - the checkasm tests are meant for developers working on the assembly implementations anyway, so whenever the test fails, the printouts are valuable. // 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".
prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-06-21 20:12 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2022-06-13 16:36 Swinney, Jonathan 2022-06-21 20:12 ` Martin Storsjö [this message]
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=3019b79-50b9-e449-9f3b-84858c33722c@martin.st \ --to=martin@martin.st \ --cc=ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org \ --cc=jdek@itanimul.li \ --cc=jswinney@amazon.com \ --cc=spop@amazon.com \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Git Inbox Mirror of the ffmpeg-devel mailing list - see https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel This inbox may be cloned and mirrored by anyone: git clone --mirror https://master.gitmailbox.com/ffmpegdev/0 ffmpegdev/git/0.git # If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may # initialize and index your mirror using the following commands: public-inbox-init -V2 ffmpegdev ffmpegdev/ https://master.gitmailbox.com/ffmpegdev \ ffmpegdev@gitmailbox.com public-inbox-index ffmpegdev Example config snippet for mirrors. AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/public-inbox.git