[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH 1/2] x86: Don't hardcode the height to 8 in sad8_xy2_mmx

[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH 1/2] x86: Don't hardcode the height to 8 in sad8_xy2_mmx

[Martin Storsjö]

The height is hardcoded in some of the me_cmp functions, but not
in all of them. But in the case of all other functions, it's hardcoded
in the same place in SIMD functions as in the C reference functions,
while this one function differs from the behaviour of the C code.

(Before 542765ce3eccbca587d54262a512cbdb1407230d, there were a
couple other sad8_*_mmx functions with similar hardcoded height.)
---
 libavcodec/x86/me_cmp_init.c | 3 +--
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/libavcodec/x86/me_cmp_init.c b/libavcodec/x86/me_cmp_init.c
index 61e9396b8f..dcc2621276 100644
--- a/libavcodec/x86/me_cmp_init.c
+++ b/libavcodec/x86/me_cmp_init.c
@@ -202,13 +202,12 @@ static inline int sum_mmx(void)
 static int sad8_xy2_ ## suf(MpegEncContext *v, uint8_t *blk2,           \
                             uint8_t *blk1, ptrdiff_t stride, int h)     \
 {                                                                       \
-    av_assert2(h == 8);                                                     \
     __asm__ volatile (                                                  \
         "pxor %%mm7, %%mm7     \n\t"                                    \
         "pxor %%mm6, %%mm6     \n\t"                                    \
         ::);                                                            \
                                                                         \
-    sad8_4_ ## suf(blk1, blk2, stride, 8);                              \
+    sad8_4_ ## suf(blk1, blk2, stride, h);                              \
                                                                         \
     return sum_ ## suf();                                               \
 }                                                                       \
-- 
2.25.1

_______________________________________________
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".

[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH 2/2] RFC: checkasm: motion: Test different h parameters

[Martin Storsjö]

Previously, the checkasm test always passed h=8, so no other cases
were tested.

Out of the me_cmp functions, in practice, some functions are hardcoded
to always assume a 8x8 block (ignoring the h parameter), while others
do use the parameter. For those with hardcoded height, both the
reference C function and the assembly implementations ignore the
parameter similarly.

The documentation for the functions indicate that heights between
w/2 and 2*w, within the range of 4 to 16, should be supported. This
patch just tests random heights in that range, without knowing what
width the current function actually uses.
---
I'm not sure if it's good to have checkasm exercise cases that
don't occur in practice or not. In particular, the aarch64
functions have a separate implementation for non-multiple-of-4
height, which probably doesn't ever get called in practice, while
other SIMD implementations lack that.

Alternatively, we'd improve the documentation for the expectations
for these functions and make the test match that, and remove the
unused non-multiple-of-4 case in the aarch64 assembly.
---
 tests/checkasm/motion.c | 10 ++++++----
 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/tests/checkasm/motion.c b/tests/checkasm/motion.c
index 0112822174..79e4358941 100644
--- a/tests/checkasm/motion.c
+++ b/tests/checkasm/motion.c
@@ -45,7 +45,7 @@ static void test_motion(const char *name, me_cmp_func test_func)
     /* motion estimation can look up to 17 bytes ahead */
     static const int look_ahead = 17;
 
-    int i, x, y, d1, d2;
+    int i, x, y, h, d1, d2;
     uint8_t *ptr;
 
     LOCAL_ALIGNED_16(uint8_t, img1, [WIDTH * HEIGHT]);
@@ -68,14 +68,16 @@ static void test_motion(const char *name, me_cmp_func test_func)
         for (i = 0; i < ITERATIONS; i++) {
             x = rnd() % (WIDTH - look_ahead);
             y = rnd() % (HEIGHT - look_ahead);
+            // Pick a random h between 4 and 16; pick an even value.
+            h = 4 + ((rnd() % (16 + 1 - 4)) & ~1);
 
             ptr = img2 + y * WIDTH + x;
-            d2 = call_ref(NULL, img1, ptr, WIDTH, 8);
-            d1 = call_new(NULL, img1, ptr, WIDTH, 8);
+            d2 = call_ref(NULL, img1, ptr, WIDTH, h);
+            d1 = call_new(NULL, img1, ptr, WIDTH, h);
 
             if (d1 != d2) {
                 fail();
-                printf("func: %s, x=%d y=%d, error: asm=%d c=%d\n", name, x, y, d1, d2);
+                printf("func: %s, x=%d y=%d h=%d, error: asm=%d c=%d\n", name, x, y, h, d1, d2);
                 break;
             }
         }
-- 
2.25.1

_______________________________________________
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".

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH 2/2] RFC: checkasm: motion: Test different h parameters

[Martin Storsjö]

On Wed, 13 Jul 2022, Martin Storsjö wrote:

> Previously, the checkasm test always passed h=8, so no other cases
> were tested.
>
> Out of the me_cmp functions, in practice, some functions are hardcoded
> to always assume a 8x8 block (ignoring the h parameter), while others
> do use the parameter. For those with hardcoded height, both the
> reference C function and the assembly implementations ignore the
> parameter similarly.
>
> The documentation for the functions indicate that heights between
> w/2 and 2*w, within the range of 4 to 16, should be supported. This
> patch just tests random heights in that range, without knowing what
> width the current function actually uses.
> ---
> I'm not sure if it's good to have checkasm exercise cases that
> don't occur in practice or not. In particular, the aarch64
> functions have a separate implementation for non-multiple-of-4
> height, which probably doesn't ever get called in practice, while
> other SIMD implementations lack that.
>
> Alternatively, we'd improve the documentation for the expectations
> for these functions and make the test match that, and remove the
> unused non-multiple-of-4 case in the aarch64 assembly.
> ---
> tests/checkasm/motion.c | 10 ++++++----
> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/tests/checkasm/motion.c b/tests/checkasm/motion.c
> index 0112822174..79e4358941 100644
> --- a/tests/checkasm/motion.c
> +++ b/tests/checkasm/motion.c
> @@ -45,7 +45,7 @@ static void test_motion(const char *name, me_cmp_func test_func)
>     /* motion estimation can look up to 17 bytes ahead */
>     static const int look_ahead = 17;
>
> -    int i, x, y, d1, d2;
> +    int i, x, y, h, d1, d2;
>     uint8_t *ptr;
>
>     LOCAL_ALIGNED_16(uint8_t, img1, [WIDTH * HEIGHT]);
> @@ -68,14 +68,16 @@ static void test_motion(const char *name, me_cmp_func test_func)
>         for (i = 0; i < ITERATIONS; i++) {
>             x = rnd() % (WIDTH - look_ahead);
>             y = rnd() % (HEIGHT - look_ahead);
> +            // Pick a random h between 4 and 16; pick an even value.
> +            h = 4 + ((rnd() % (16 + 1 - 4)) & ~1);
>
>             ptr = img2 + y * WIDTH + x;
> -            d2 = call_ref(NULL, img1, ptr, WIDTH, 8);
> -            d1 = call_new(NULL, img1, ptr, WIDTH, 8);
> +            d2 = call_ref(NULL, img1, ptr, WIDTH, h);
> +            d1 = call_new(NULL, img1, ptr, WIDTH, h);
>
>             if (d1 != d2) {
>                 fail();
> -                printf("func: %s, x=%d y=%d, error: asm=%d c=%d\n", name, x, y, d1, d2);
> +                printf("func: %s, x=%d y=%d h=%d, error: asm=%d c=%d\n", name, x, y, h, d1, d2);
>                 break;
>             }
>         }
> -- 
> 2.25.1

Ping

// 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".

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH 2/2] RFC: checkasm: motion: Test different h parameters

[Martin Storsjö]

On Thu, 4 Aug 2022, Martin Storsjö wrote:

> On Wed, 13 Jul 2022, Martin Storsjö wrote:
>
>> Previously, the checkasm test always passed h=8, so no other cases
>> were tested.
>> 
>> Out of the me_cmp functions, in practice, some functions are hardcoded
>> to always assume a 8x8 block (ignoring the h parameter), while others
>> do use the parameter. For those with hardcoded height, both the
>> reference C function and the assembly implementations ignore the
>> parameter similarly.
>> 
>> The documentation for the functions indicate that heights between
>> w/2 and 2*w, within the range of 4 to 16, should be supported. This
>> patch just tests random heights in that range, without knowing what
>> width the current function actually uses.
>> ---
>> I'm not sure if it's good to have checkasm exercise cases that
>> don't occur in practice or not. In particular, the aarch64
>> functions have a separate implementation for non-multiple-of-4
>> height, which probably doesn't ever get called in practice, while
>> other SIMD implementations lack that.
>> 
>> Alternatively, we'd improve the documentation for the expectations
>> for these functions and make the test match that, and remove the
>> unused non-multiple-of-4 case in the aarch64 assembly.
>> ---
>> tests/checkasm/motion.c | 10 ++++++----
>> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>> 
>> diff --git a/tests/checkasm/motion.c b/tests/checkasm/motion.c
>> index 0112822174..79e4358941 100644
>> --- a/tests/checkasm/motion.c
>> +++ b/tests/checkasm/motion.c
>> @@ -45,7 +45,7 @@ static void test_motion(const char *name, me_cmp_func 
>> test_func)
>>     /* motion estimation can look up to 17 bytes ahead */
>>     static const int look_ahead = 17;
>> 
>> -    int i, x, y, d1, d2;
>> +    int i, x, y, h, d1, d2;
>>     uint8_t *ptr;
>>
>>     LOCAL_ALIGNED_16(uint8_t, img1, [WIDTH * HEIGHT]);
>> @@ -68,14 +68,16 @@ static void test_motion(const char *name, me_cmp_func 
>> test_func)
>>         for (i = 0; i < ITERATIONS; i++) {
>>             x = rnd() % (WIDTH - look_ahead);
>>             y = rnd() % (HEIGHT - look_ahead);
>> +            // Pick a random h between 4 and 16; pick an even value.
>> +            h = 4 + ((rnd() % (16 + 1 - 4)) & ~1);
>>
>>             ptr = img2 + y * WIDTH + x;
>> -            d2 = call_ref(NULL, img1, ptr, WIDTH, 8);
>> -            d1 = call_new(NULL, img1, ptr, WIDTH, 8);
>> +            d2 = call_ref(NULL, img1, ptr, WIDTH, h);
>> +            d1 = call_new(NULL, img1, ptr, WIDTH, h);
>>
>>             if (d1 != d2) {
>>                 fail();
>> -                printf("func: %s, x=%d y=%d, error: asm=%d c=%d\n", name, 
>> x, y, d1, d2);
>> +                printf("func: %s, x=%d y=%d h=%d, error: asm=%d c=%d\n", 
>> name, x, y, h, d1, d2);
>>                 break;
>>             }
>>         }
>> -- 
>> 2.25.1
>
> Ping

As there doesn't seem to be much opinion on this, I'll go ahead and land 
this (patch 1/2 was approved already), as this improves the test coverage 
for the aarch64 neon me_cmp assembly patches that are in progress.

// 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".

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH 1/2] x86: Don't hardcode the height to 8 in sad8_xy2_mmx

[Martin Storsjö]

On Wed, 13 Jul 2022, Martin Storsjö wrote:

> The height is hardcoded in some of the me_cmp functions, but not
> in all of them. But in the case of all other functions, it's hardcoded
> in the same place in SIMD functions as in the C reference functions,
> while this one function differs from the behaviour of the C code.
>
> (Before 542765ce3eccbca587d54262a512cbdb1407230d, there were a
> couple other sad8_*_mmx functions with similar hardcoded height.)
> ---
> libavcodec/x86/me_cmp_init.c | 3 +--
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/libavcodec/x86/me_cmp_init.c b/libavcodec/x86/me_cmp_init.c
> index 61e9396b8f..dcc2621276 100644
> --- a/libavcodec/x86/me_cmp_init.c
> +++ b/libavcodec/x86/me_cmp_init.c
> @@ -202,13 +202,12 @@ static inline int sum_mmx(void)
> static int sad8_xy2_ ## suf(MpegEncContext *v, uint8_t *blk2,           \
>                             uint8_t *blk1, ptrdiff_t stride, int h)     \
> {                                                                       \
> -    av_assert2(h == 8);                                                     \
>     __asm__ volatile (                                                  \
>         "pxor %%mm7, %%mm7     \n\t"                                    \
>         "pxor %%mm6, %%mm6     \n\t"                                    \
>         ::);                                                            \
>                                                                         \
> -    sad8_4_ ## suf(blk1, blk2, stride, 8);                              \
> +    sad8_4_ ## suf(blk1, blk2, stride, h);                              \
>                                                                         \
>     return sum_ ## suf();                                               \
> }                                                                       \
> -- 
> 2.25.1

Ping, does this seem reasonable? Michael indicated a desire to make the 
me_cmp functions more general and flexible than what they are today, and 
this would be a first step to making checkasm test such cases.

// 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".

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH 1/2] x86: Don't hardcode the height to 8 in sad8_xy2_mmx

[Michael Niedermayer]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2669 bytes --]

On Thu, Aug 04, 2022 at 10:47:34AM +0300, Martin Storsjö wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Jul 2022, Martin Storsjö wrote:
> 
> > The height is hardcoded in some of the me_cmp functions, but not
> > in all of them. But in the case of all other functions, it's hardcoded
> > in the same place in SIMD functions as in the C reference functions,
> > while this one function differs from the behaviour of the C code.
> > 
> > (Before 542765ce3eccbca587d54262a512cbdb1407230d, there were a
> > couple other sad8_*_mmx functions with similar hardcoded height.)
> > ---
> > libavcodec/x86/me_cmp_init.c | 3 +--
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/libavcodec/x86/me_cmp_init.c b/libavcodec/x86/me_cmp_init.c
> > index 61e9396b8f..dcc2621276 100644
> > --- a/libavcodec/x86/me_cmp_init.c
> > +++ b/libavcodec/x86/me_cmp_init.c
> > @@ -202,13 +202,12 @@ static inline int sum_mmx(void)
> > static int sad8_xy2_ ## suf(MpegEncContext *v, uint8_t *blk2,           \
> >                             uint8_t *blk1, ptrdiff_t stride, int h)     \
> > {                                                                       \
> > -    av_assert2(h == 8);                                                     \
> >     __asm__ volatile (                                                  \
> >         "pxor %%mm7, %%mm7     \n\t"                                    \
> >         "pxor %%mm6, %%mm6     \n\t"                                    \
> >         ::);                                                            \
> >                                                                         \
> > -    sad8_4_ ## suf(blk1, blk2, stride, 8);                              \
> > +    sad8_4_ ## suf(blk1, blk2, stride, h);                              \
> >                                                                         \
> >     return sum_ ## suf();                                               \
> > }                                                                       \
> > -- 
> > 2.25.1
> 
> Ping, does this seem reasonable? Michael indicated a desire to make the
> me_cmp functions more general and flexible than what they are today, and
> this would be a first step to making checkasm test such cases.

LGTM assuming it doesnt have any problematic perforamce impact

thx

[...]
-- 
Michael     GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB

Frequently ignored answer#1 FFmpeg bugs should be sent to our bugtracker. User
questions about the command line tools should be sent to the ffmpeg-user ML.
And questions about how to use libav* should be sent to the libav-user ML.

[-- Attachment #1.2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 195 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 251 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
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".

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH 1/2] x86: Don't hardcode the height to 8 in sad8_xy2_mmx

[Martin Storsjö]

On Thu, 4 Aug 2022, Michael Niedermayer wrote:

> On Thu, Aug 04, 2022 at 10:47:34AM +0300, Martin Storsjö wrote:
>> On Wed, 13 Jul 2022, Martin Storsjö wrote:
>>
>>> The height is hardcoded in some of the me_cmp functions, but not
>>> in all of them. But in the case of all other functions, it's hardcoded
>>> in the same place in SIMD functions as in the C reference functions,
>>> while this one function differs from the behaviour of the C code.
>>>
>>> (Before 542765ce3eccbca587d54262a512cbdb1407230d, there were a
>>> couple other sad8_*_mmx functions with similar hardcoded height.)
>>> ---
>>> libavcodec/x86/me_cmp_init.c | 3 +--
>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/libavcodec/x86/me_cmp_init.c b/libavcodec/x86/me_cmp_init.c
>>> index 61e9396b8f..dcc2621276 100644
>>> --- a/libavcodec/x86/me_cmp_init.c
>>> +++ b/libavcodec/x86/me_cmp_init.c
>>> @@ -202,13 +202,12 @@ static inline int sum_mmx(void)
>>> static int sad8_xy2_ ## suf(MpegEncContext *v, uint8_t *blk2,           \
>>>                             uint8_t *blk1, ptrdiff_t stride, int h)     \
>>> {                                                                       \
>>> -    av_assert2(h == 8);                                                     \
>>>     __asm__ volatile (                                                  \
>>>         "pxor %%mm7, %%mm7     \n\t"                                    \
>>>         "pxor %%mm6, %%mm6     \n\t"                                    \
>>>         ::);                                                            \
>>>                                                                         \
>>> -    sad8_4_ ## suf(blk1, blk2, stride, 8);                              \
>>> +    sad8_4_ ## suf(blk1, blk2, stride, h);                              \
>>>                                                                         \
>>>     return sum_ ## suf();                                               \
>>> }                                                                       \
>>> --
>>> 2.25.1
>>
>> Ping, does this seem reasonable? Michael indicated a desire to make the
>> me_cmp functions more general and flexible than what they are today, and
>> this would be a first step to making checkasm test such cases.
>
> LGTM assuming it doesnt have any problematic perforamce impact

Thanks - I didn't notice any significant change in the checkasm bench 
numbers for it.

// 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".