From: "Martin Storsjö" <martin@martin.st>
To: "Swinney, Jonathan" <jswinney@amazon.com>
Cc: "Pop, Sebastian" <spop@amazon.com>,
"ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org" <ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org>
Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH 1/2] swscale/aarch64: add hscale specializations
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2022 11:44:24 +0300 (EEST)
Message-ID: <8d635a8-835c-ffaa-e2d9-e7a39e9cec4e@martin.st> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <57a72619-3ae3-3740-6959-fe1479713315@martin.st>
On Sun, 17 Apr 2022, Martin Storsjö wrote:
> On Fri, 15 Apr 2022, Swinney, Jonathan wrote:
>
>> This patch adds specializations for hscale for filterSize == 4 and 8 and
>> converts the existing implementation for the X8 version. For the old code,
>> now
>> used for the X8 version, it improves the efficiency of the final summations
>> by
>> reducing 11 instructions to 7.
>>
>> ff_hscale8to15_8_neon is mostly unchanged from the original except for a
>> few
>> changes.
>> - The loads for the filter data were consolidated into a single 64 byte ld1
>> instruction.
>
> Couldn't you do this optimization on the existing function too?
Sorry, now I realized why this optimization only can be done if you
operate on a specific known filter width.
>> - The final summations were improved.
>> - The inner loop on filterSize was completely removed
>
> I presume that this is the only differing factor which affects whether it's
> worthwhile to keep a separate width=8 function or not. At least from the
> checkasm benchmark numbers, the difference is notable but not huge (on the
> range of 4-10%, while the summation improvements gain even more).
>
> Given a fully optimized function that has an inner loop (which is only taken
> once for the width=8 case), is the separate function without an inner loop
> really necessary?
With the ideal version of the final summation in both functions, the
separate filtersize=8 function is 11-19% faster than the generic
multiple-of-8 function (on Cortex A53 and A72 - on A73 the both versions
are essentially equally fast), so there's probably good reason to go with
the separate version.
Thus, disregard the review comments above.
// 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:[~2022-04-20 8:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-04-15 21:36 Swinney, Jonathan
2022-04-16 21:22 ` Martin Storsjö
2022-04-20 8:44 ` 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=8d635a8-835c-ffaa-e2d9-e7a39e9cec4e@martin.st \
--to=martin@martin.st \
--cc=ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org \
--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