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