[x265] [PATCH] Add aarch64 support - Part 2

[Xiyuan Wang]

Hi chen
   we didn't receive your reply about Part-1, can you resend it? Maybe the
content is too large and the mail list blocked it. You can just quote the
code where you have questions.

Thanks.

chen <chenm003 at 163.com> 于2020年3月18日周三 上午9:07写道：

>
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 2:59 PM Suyimeng <yimeng.su at huawei.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> *From:* x265-devel [mailto:x265-devel-bounces at videolan.org] *On Behalf
>> Of *Gopi Satykrishna Akisetty
>> *Sent:* Tuesday, March 17, 2020 4:53 PM
>> *To:* Development for x265 <x265-devel at videolan.org>
>> *Subject:* Re: [x265] [PATCH] Add aarch64 support - Part 2
>>
>>
>>
>> diff --git a/source/common/pixel.cpp b/source/common/pixel.cpp
>> index 99b84449c..e4f890cd5 100644
>> --- a/source/common/pixel.cpp
>> +++ b/source/common/pixel.cpp
>> @@ -5,6 +5,7 @@
>>   *          Mandar Gurav <mandar at multicorewareinc.com>
>>   *          Mahesh Pittala <mahesh at multicorewareinc.com>
>>   *          Min Chen <min.chen at multicorewareinc.com>
>> + *          Hongbin Liu<liuhongbin1 at huawei.com>
>>   *
>>   * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
>>   * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
>> @@ -265,6 +266,10 @@ int satd4(const pixel* pix1, intptr_t stride_pix1,
>> const pixel* pix2, intptr_t s
>>  {
>>      int satd = 0;
>>
>> +#if ENABLE_ASSEMBLY && X265_ARCH_ARM64
>> +    pixelcmp_t satd_4x4 = x265_pixel_satd_4x4_neon;
>> +#endif
>>
>> is there any specific reason why the above code is added?? is this a kind
>> of a temporary fix for the output mismatch between c and asm code?
>>
>> No, c and asm output is matched. Currently we only complete partial satd
>> primatives. This is a workaround that improve all satd primitives with asm
>> code. Maybe there is a bad code style.
>>
>> If I understand correctly, you are trying to use a combination of c and
>> asm code for all other kernel sizes that you have not completed asm
>> implementation yet?
>>
>> Yes, you are right.
>>
> ok. If this code block is going to be removed in the future patches, where
> you will be implementing the asm for remaining satd  kernels, then this
> patch is good to be pushed.
>
> before push the patches, I want to double check how about response for my
> review on Part-1?
> I am not sure I missed these email, or my post still in pending.
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20200318/991603bc/attachment.html>