[x265] [PATCH] inline mvcost() to reduce address operators
chen
chenm003 at 163.com
Wed May 6 19:11:01 CEST 2015
At 2015-05-07 01:04:23,"Steve Borho" <steve at borho.org> wrote:
>On 05/06, chen wrote:
>>
>>
>> At 2015-05-06 08:38:24,"Steve Borho" <steve at borho.org> wrote:
>> >On 05/05, Min Chen wrote:
>> >> # HG changeset patch
>> >> # User Min Chen <chenm003 at 163.com>
>> >> # Date 1430862259 25200
>> >> # Node ID 50ce2c0ddfbb743b45f678ee2e6b796762ad868f
>> >> # Parent f32e6464225afa02983af1b1905f50cdccae5244
>> >> inline mvcost() to reduce address operators
>> >
>> >I'm skeptical that this is a good idea. have you measured the difference
>> >in performance with encoders built with profile-guided optimizations?
>>
>> I found this idea from vtune assembly report (preset ultrafast), it show bottleneck in signed address extendsion because offset is signed integer.
>> In the ICL, when we use keyword 'restrict' can avoid part of these reduce operators.
>>
>> after this patch, I got 10% improve in ME module or call ~2% in total encode.
>
>I see, so this is bypassing the int->short->int signed int conversions.
>In that case it's probably ok to explode the code this way.
it convert short->int->long
>
>> >
>> >> source/encoder/motion.cpp | 48 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------
>> >> 1 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
>> >>
>> >> diff -r f32e6464225a -r 50ce2c0ddfbb source/encoder/motion.cpp
>> >> --- a/source/encoder/motion.cpp Mon May 04 15:15:42 2015 -0500
>> >> +++ b/source/encoder/motion.cpp Tue May 05 14:44:19 2015 -0700
>> >> @@ -234,9 +234,14 @@
>> >> pix_base + (m1x) + (m1y) * stride, \
>> >> pix_base + (m2x) + (m2y) * stride, \
>> >> stride, costs); \
>> >> - (costs)[0] += mvcost((bmv + MV(m0x, m0y)) << 2); \
>> >> - (costs)[1] += mvcost((bmv + MV(m1x, m1y)) << 2); \
>> >> - (costs)[2] += mvcost((bmv + MV(m2x, m2y)) << 2); \
>> >> + const uint16_t *base_mvx = &m_cost_mvx[(bmv.x + (m0x)) << 2]; \
>> >> + const uint16_t *base_mvy = &m_cost_mvy[(bmv.y + (m0y)) << 2]; \
>> >> + X265_CHECK(mvcost((bmv + MV(m0x, m0y)) << 2) == (base_mvx[((m0x) - (m0x)) << 2] + base_mvy[((m0y) - (m0y)) << 2]), "mvcost() check failure\n"); \
>> >> + X265_CHECK(mvcost((bmv + MV(m1x, m1y)) << 2) == (base_mvx[((m1x) - (m0x)) << 2] + base_mvy[((m1y) - (m0y)) << 2]), "mvcost() check failure\n"); \
>> >> + X265_CHECK(mvcost((bmv + MV(m2x, m2y)) << 2) == (base_mvx[((m2x) - (m0x)) << 2] + base_mvy[((m2y) - (m0y)) << 2]), "mvcost() check failure\n"); \
>> >> + (costs)[0] += (base_mvx[((m0x) - (m0x)) << 2] + base_mvy[((m0y) - (m0y)) << 2]); \
>> >> + (costs)[1] += (base_mvx[((m1x) - (m0x)) << 2] + base_mvy[((m1y) - (m0y)) << 2]); \
>> >> + (costs)[2] += (base_mvx[((m2x) - (m0x)) << 2] + base_mvy[((m2y) - (m0y)) << 2]); \
>> >> }
>> >>
>> >> #define COST_MV_PT_DIST_X4(m0x, m0y, p0, d0, m1x, m1y, p1, d1, m2x, m2y, p2, d2, m3x, m3y, p3, d3) \
>> >> @@ -247,10 +252,10 @@
>> >> fref + (m2x) + (m2y) * stride, \
>> >> fref + (m3x) + (m3y) * stride, \
>> >> stride, costs); \
>> >> - costs[0] += mvcost(MV(m0x, m0y) << 2); \
>> >> - costs[1] += mvcost(MV(m1x, m1y) << 2); \
>> >> - costs[2] += mvcost(MV(m2x, m2y) << 2); \
>> >> - costs[3] += mvcost(MV(m3x, m3y) << 2); \
>> >> + (costs)[0] += mvcost(MV(m0x, m0y) << 2); \
>> >> + (costs)[1] += mvcost(MV(m1x, m1y) << 2); \
>> >> + (costs)[2] += mvcost(MV(m2x, m2y) << 2); \
>> >> + (costs)[3] += mvcost(MV(m3x, m3y) << 2); \
>
>why was this one spared? you only added parents around the macro
>argument.
just keep same style to previous macro, we can ignore it
>
>> >> COPY4_IF_LT(bcost, costs[0], bmv, MV(m0x, m0y), bPointNr, p0, bDistance, d0); \
>> >> COPY4_IF_LT(bcost, costs[1], bmv, MV(m1x, m1y), bPointNr, p1, bDistance, d1); \
>> >> COPY4_IF_LT(bcost, costs[2], bmv, MV(m2x, m2y), bPointNr, p2, bDistance, d2); \
>> >> @@ -266,10 +271,16 @@
>> >> pix_base + (m2x) + (m2y) * stride, \
>> >> pix_base + (m3x) + (m3y) * stride, \
>> >> stride, costs); \
>> >> - costs[0] += mvcost((omv + MV(m0x, m0y)) << 2); \
>> >> - costs[1] += mvcost((omv + MV(m1x, m1y)) << 2); \
>> >> - costs[2] += mvcost((omv + MV(m2x, m2y)) << 2); \
>> >> - costs[3] += mvcost((omv + MV(m3x, m3y)) << 2); \
>> >> + const uint16_t *base_mvx = &m_cost_mvx[(omv.x << 2)]; \
>> >> + const uint16_t *base_mvy = &m_cost_mvy[(omv.y << 2)]; \
>> >> + X265_CHECK(mvcost((omv + MV(m0x, m0y)) << 2) == (base_mvx[(m0x) << 2] + base_mvy[(m0y) << 2]), "mvcost() check failure\n"); \
>> >> + X265_CHECK(mvcost((omv + MV(m1x, m1y)) << 2) == (base_mvx[(m1x) << 2] + base_mvy[(m1y) << 2]), "mvcost() check failure\n"); \
>> >> + X265_CHECK(mvcost((omv + MV(m2x, m2y)) << 2) == (base_mvx[(m2x) << 2] + base_mvy[(m2y) << 2]), "mvcost() check failure\n"); \
>> >> + X265_CHECK(mvcost((omv + MV(m3x, m3y)) << 2) == (base_mvx[(m3x) << 2] + base_mvy[(m3y) << 2]), "mvcost() check failure\n"); \
>> >> + costs[0] += (base_mvx[(m0x) << 2] + base_mvy[(m0y) << 2]); \
>> >> + costs[1] += (base_mvx[(m1x) << 2] + base_mvy[(m1y) << 2]); \
>> >> + costs[2] += (base_mvx[(m2x) << 2] + base_mvy[(m2y) << 2]); \
>> >> + costs[3] += (base_mvx[(m3x) << 2] + base_mvy[(m3y) << 2]); \
>> >> COPY2_IF_LT(bcost, costs[0], bmv, omv + MV(m0x, m0y)); \
>> >> COPY2_IF_LT(bcost, costs[1], bmv, omv + MV(m1x, m1y)); \
>> >> COPY2_IF_LT(bcost, costs[2], bmv, omv + MV(m2x, m2y)); \
>> >> @@ -285,10 +296,17 @@
>> >> pix_base + (m2x) + (m2y) * stride, \
>> >> pix_base + (m3x) + (m3y) * stride, \
>> >> stride, costs); \
>> >> - (costs)[0] += mvcost((bmv + MV(m0x, m0y)) << 2); \
>> >> - (costs)[1] += mvcost((bmv + MV(m1x, m1y)) << 2); \
>> >> - (costs)[2] += mvcost((bmv + MV(m2x, m2y)) << 2); \
>> >> - (costs)[3] += mvcost((bmv + MV(m3x, m3y)) << 2); \
>> >> + /* TODO: use restrict keyword in ICL */ \
>
>use restrict where?
>
>> >> + const uint16_t *base_mvx = &m_cost_mvx[(bmv.x << 2)]; \
>> >> + const uint16_t *base_mvy = &m_cost_mvy[(bmv.y << 2)]; \
>> >> + X265_CHECK(mvcost((bmv + MV(m0x, m0y)) << 2) == (base_mvx[(m0x) << 2] + base_mvy[(m0y) << 2]), "mvcost() check failure\n"); \
>> >> + X265_CHECK(mvcost((bmv + MV(m1x, m1y)) << 2) == (base_mvx[(m1x) << 2] + base_mvy[(m1y) << 2]), "mvcost() check failure\n"); \
>> >> + X265_CHECK(mvcost((bmv + MV(m2x, m2y)) << 2) == (base_mvx[(m2x) << 2] + base_mvy[(m2y) << 2]), "mvcost() check failure\n"); \
>> >> + X265_CHECK(mvcost((bmv + MV(m3x, m3y)) << 2) == (base_mvx[(m3x) << 2] + base_mvy[(m3y) << 2]), "mvcost() check failure\n"); \
>> >> + (costs)[0] += (base_mvx[(m0x) << 2] + base_mvy[(m0y) << 2]); \
>> >> + (costs)[1] += (base_mvx[(m1x) << 2] + base_mvy[(m1y) << 2]); \
>> >> + (costs)[2] += (base_mvx[(m2x) << 2] + base_mvy[(m2y) << 2]); \
>> >> + (costs)[3] += (base_mvx[(m3x) << 2] + base_mvy[(m3y) << 2]); \
>> >> }
>> >>
>> >> #define DIA1_ITER(mx, my) \
>> >>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> x265-devel mailing list
>> >> x265-devel at videolan.org
>> >> https://mailman.videolan.org/listinfo/x265-devel
>> >
>> >--
>> >Steve Borho
>> >_______________________________________________
>> >x265-devel mailing list
>> >x265-devel at videolan.org
>> >https://mailman.videolan.org/listinfo/x265-devel
>
>> _______________________________________________
>> x265-devel mailing list
>> x265-devel at videolan.org
>> https://mailman.videolan.org/listinfo/x265-devel
>
>
>--
>Steve Borho
>_______________________________________________
>x265-devel mailing list
>x265-devel at videolan.org
>https://mailman.videolan.org/listinfo/x265-devel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.videolan.org/pipermail/x265-devel/attachments/20150507/c49d216c/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the x265-devel
mailing list