1. 17 Nov, 2016 8 commits
  2. 16 Nov, 2016 7 commits
  3. 15 Nov, 2016 2 commits
  4. 14 Nov, 2016 9 commits
  5. 13 Nov, 2016 6 commits
    • Martin Storsjö's avatar
      aarch64: vp9: Implement NEON loop filters · 9d2afd1e
      Martin Storsjö authored
      This work is sponsored by, and copyright, Google.
      
      These are ported from the ARM version; thanks to the larger
      amount of registers available, we can do the loop filters with
      16 pixels at a time. The implementation is fully templated, with
      a single macro which can generate versions for both 8 and
      16 pixels wide, for both 4, 8 and 16 pixels loop filters
      (and the 4/8 mixed versions as well).
      
      For the 8 pixel wide versions, it is pretty close in speed (the
      v_4_8 and v_8_8 filters are the best examples of this; the h_4_8
      and h_8_8 filters seem to get some gain in the load/transpose/store
      part). For the 16 pixels wide ones, we get a speedup of around
      1.2-1.4x compared to the 32 bit version.
      
      Examples of runtimes vs the 32 bit version, on a Cortex A53:
                                             ARM AArch64
      vp9_loop_filter_h_4_8_neon:          144.0   127.2
      vp9_loop_filter_h_8_8_neon:          207.0   182.5
      vp9_loop_filter_h_16_8_neon:         415.0   328.7
      vp9_loop_filter_h_16_16_neon:        672.0   558.6
      vp9_loop_filter_mix2_h_44_16_neon:   302.0   203.5
      vp9_loop_filter_mix2_h_48_16_neon:   365.0   305.2
      vp9_loop_filter_mix2_h_84_16_neon:   365.0   305.2
      vp9_loop_filter_mix2_h_88_16_neon:   376.0   305.2
      vp9_loop_filter_mix2_v_44_16_neon:   193.2   128.2
      vp9_loop_filter_mix2_v_48_16_neon:   246.7   218.4
      vp9_loop_filter_mix2_v_84_16_neon:   248.0   218.5
      vp9_loop_filter_mix2_v_88_16_neon:   302.0   218.2
      vp9_loop_filter_v_4_8_neon:           89.0    88.7
      vp9_loop_filter_v_8_8_neon:          141.0   137.7
      vp9_loop_filter_v_16_8_neon:         295.0   272.7
      vp9_loop_filter_v_16_16_neon:        546.0   453.7
      
      The speedup vs C code in checkasm tests is around 2-7x, which is
      pretty much the same as for the 32 bit version. Even if these functions
      are faster than their 32 bit equivalent, the C version that we compare
      to also became around 1.3-1.7x faster than the C version in 32 bit.
      
      Based on START_TIMER/STOP_TIMER wrapping around a few individual
      functions, the speedup vs C code is around 4-5x.
      
      Examples of runtimes vs C on a Cortex A57 (for a slightly older version
      of the patch):
                               A57 gcc-5.3  neon
      loop_filter_h_4_8_neon:        256.6  93.4
      loop_filter_h_8_8_neon:        307.3 139.1
      loop_filter_h_16_8_neon:       340.1 254.1
      loop_filter_h_16_16_neon:      827.0 407.9
      loop_filter_mix2_h_44_16_neon: 524.5 155.4
      loop_filter_mix2_h_48_16_neon: 644.5 173.3
      loop_filter_mix2_h_84_16_neon: 630.5 222.0
      loop_filter_mix2_h_88_16_neon: 697.3 222.0
      loop_filter_mix2_v_44_16_neon: 598.5 100.6
      loop_filter_mix2_v_48_16_neon: 651.5 127.0
      loop_filter_mix2_v_84_16_neon: 591.5 167.1
      loop_filter_mix2_v_88_16_neon: 855.1 166.7
      loop_filter_v_4_8_neon:        271.7  65.3
      loop_filter_v_8_8_neon:        312.5 106.9
      loop_filter_v_16_8_neon:       473.3 206.5
      loop_filter_v_16_16_neon:      976.1 327.8
      
      The speed-up compared to the C functions is 2.5 to 6 and the cortex-a57
      is again 30-50% faster than the cortex-a53.
      Signed-off-by: 's avatarMartin Storsjö <martin@martin.st>
      9d2afd1e
    • Martin Storsjö's avatar
      52d196fb
    • Martin Storsjö's avatar
      aarch64: vp9: Add NEON itxfm routines · 3c9546df
      Martin Storsjö authored
      This work is sponsored by, and copyright, Google.
      
      These are ported from the ARM version; thanks to the larger
      amount of registers available, we can do the 16x16 and 32x32
      transforms in slices 8 pixels wide instead of 4. This gives
      a speedup of around 1.4x compared to the 32 bit version.
      
      The fact that aarch64 doesn't have the same d/q register
      aliasing makes some of the macros quite a bit simpler as well.
      
      Examples of runtimes vs the 32 bit version, on a Cortex A53:
                                             ARM  AArch64
      vp9_inv_adst_adst_4x4_add_neon:       90.0     87.7
      vp9_inv_adst_adst_8x8_add_neon:      400.0    354.7
      vp9_inv_adst_adst_16x16_add_neon:   2526.5   1827.2
      vp9_inv_dct_dct_4x4_add_neon:         74.0     72.7
      vp9_inv_dct_dct_8x8_add_neon:        271.0    256.7
      vp9_inv_dct_dct_16x16_add_neon:     1960.7   1372.7
      vp9_inv_dct_dct_32x32_add_neon:    11988.9   8088.3
      vp9_inv_wht_wht_4x4_add_neon:         63.0     57.7
      
      The speedup vs C code (2-4x) is smaller than in the 32 bit case,
      mostly because the C code ends up significantly faster (around
      1.6x faster, with GCC 5.4) when built for aarch64.
      
      Examples of runtimes vs C on a Cortex A57 (for a slightly older version
      of the patch):
                                      A57 gcc-5.3   neon
      vp9_inv_adst_adst_4x4_add_neon:       152.2   60.0
      vp9_inv_adst_adst_8x8_add_neon:       948.2  288.0
      vp9_inv_adst_adst_16x16_add_neon:    4830.4 1380.5
      vp9_inv_dct_dct_4x4_add_neon:         153.0   58.6
      vp9_inv_dct_dct_8x8_add_neon:         789.2  180.2
      vp9_inv_dct_dct_16x16_add_neon:      3639.6  917.1
      vp9_inv_dct_dct_32x32_add_neon:     20462.1 4985.0
      vp9_inv_wht_wht_4x4_add_neon:          91.0   49.8
      
      The asm is around factor 3-4 faster than C on the cortex-a57 and the asm
      is around 30-50% faster on the a57 compared to the a53.
      Signed-off-by: 's avatarMartin Storsjö <martin@martin.st>
      3c9546df
    • Diego Biurrun's avatar
      avconv_opt: Consistently iterate through hwaccels array in all cases · 01348e41
      Diego Biurrun authored
      avconv_opt.c:188:19: warning: comparison of unsigned expression < 0 is always false [-Wtype-limits]
      01348e41
    • Diego Biurrun's avatar
      Drop pointless void* casts · 800d91d3
      Diego Biurrun authored
      800d91d3
    • Diego Biurrun's avatar
      aac: Drop pointless cast · d316f9ce
      Diego Biurrun authored
      d316f9ce
  6. 12 Nov, 2016 3 commits
  7. 11 Nov, 2016 5 commits
    • Martin Storsjö's avatar
      arm: vp9: Add NEON loop filters · dd299a2d
      Martin Storsjö authored
      This work is sponsored by, and copyright, Google.
      
      The implementation tries to have smart handling of cases
      where no pixels need the full filtering for the 8/16 width
      filters, skipping both calculation and writeback of the
      unmodified pixels in those cases. The actual effect of this
      is hard to test with checkasm though, since it tests the
      full filtering, and the benefit depends on how many filtered
      blocks use the shortcut.
      
      Examples of relative speedup compared to the C version, from checkasm:
                                Cortex       A7     A8     A9    A53
      vp9_loop_filter_h_4_8_neon:          2.72   2.68   1.78   3.15
      vp9_loop_filter_h_8_8_neon:          2.36   2.38   1.70   2.91
      vp9_loop_filter_h_16_8_neon:         1.80   1.89   1.45   2.01
      vp9_loop_filter_h_16_16_neon:        2.81   2.78   2.18   3.16
      vp9_loop_filter_mix2_h_44_16_neon:   2.65   2.67   1.93   3.05
      vp9_loop_filter_mix2_h_48_16_neon:   2.46   2.38   1.81   2.85
      vp9_loop_filter_mix2_h_84_16_neon:   2.50   2.41   1.73   2.85
      vp9_loop_filter_mix2_h_88_16_neon:   2.77   2.66   1.96   3.23
      vp9_loop_filter_mix2_v_44_16_neon:   4.28   4.46   3.22   5.70
      vp9_loop_filter_mix2_v_48_16_neon:   3.92   4.00   3.03   5.19
      vp9_loop_filter_mix2_v_84_16_neon:   3.97   4.31   2.98   5.33
      vp9_loop_filter_mix2_v_88_16_neon:   3.91   4.19   3.06   5.18
      vp9_loop_filter_v_4_8_neon:          4.53   4.47   3.31   6.05
      vp9_loop_filter_v_8_8_neon:          3.58   3.99   2.92   5.17
      vp9_loop_filter_v_16_8_neon:         3.40   3.50   2.81   4.68
      vp9_loop_filter_v_16_16_neon:        4.66   4.41   3.74   6.02
      
      The speedup vs C code is around 2-6x. The numbers are quite
      inconclusive though, since the checkasm test runs multiple filterings
      on top of each other, so later rounds might end up with different
      codepaths (different decisions on which filter to apply, based
      on input pixel differences). Disabling the early-exit in the asm
      doesn't give a fair comparison either though, since the C code
      only does the necessary calcuations for each row.
      
      Based on START_TIMER/STOP_TIMER wrapping around a few individual
      functions, the speedup vs C code is around 4-9x.
      
      This is pretty similar in runtime to the corresponding routines
      in libvpx. (This is comparing vpx_lpf_vertical_16_neon,
      vpx_lpf_horizontal_edge_8_neon and vpx_lpf_horizontal_edge_16_neon
      to vp9_loop_filter_h_16_8_neon, vp9_loop_filter_v_16_8_neon
      and vp9_loop_filter_v_16_16_neon - note that the naming of horizonal
      and vertical is flipped between the libraries.)
      
      In order to have stable, comparable numbers, the early exits in both
      asm versions were disabled, forcing the full filtering codepath.
      
                                 Cortex           A7      A8      A9     A53
      vp9_loop_filter_h_16_8_neon:             597.2   472.0   482.4   415.0
      libvpx vpx_lpf_vertical_16_neon:         626.0   464.5   470.7   445.0
      vp9_loop_filter_v_16_8_neon:             500.2   422.5   429.7   295.0
      libvpx vpx_lpf_horizontal_edge_8_neon:   586.5   414.5   415.6   383.2
      vp9_loop_filter_v_16_16_neon:            905.0   784.7   791.5   546.0
      libvpx vpx_lpf_horizontal_edge_16_neon: 1060.2   751.7   743.5   685.2
      
      Our version is consistently faster on on A7 and A53, marginally slower on
      A8, and sometimes faster, sometimes slower on A9 (marginally slower in all
      three tests in this particular test run).
      Signed-off-by: 's avatarMartin Storsjö <martin@martin.st>
      dd299a2d
    • Diego Biurrun's avatar
      libxvid: Check return value of write() call · f7d183f0
      Diego Biurrun authored
      libavcodec/libxvid_rc.c:106:9: warning: ignoring return value of ‘write’, declared with attribute warn_unused_result [-Wunused-result]
      f7d183f0
    • Diego Biurrun's avatar
      e5e8a26d
    • Diego Biurrun's avatar
      libxvid: Require availability of mkstemp() · 12db2832
      Diego Biurrun authored
      The replacement code uses tempnam(), which is dangerous.
      Such a fringe feature is not worth the trouble.
      12db2832
    • Martin Storsjö's avatar
      arm: vp9: Add NEON itxfm routines · a67ae670
      Martin Storsjö authored
      This work is sponsored by, and copyright, Google.
      
      For the transforms up to 8x8, we can fit all the data (including
      temporaries) in registers and just do a straightforward transform
      of all the data. For 16x16, we do a transform of 4x16 pixels in
      4 slices, using a temporary buffer. For 32x32, we transform 4x32
      pixels at a time, in two steps of 4x16 pixels each.
      
      Examples of relative speedup compared to the C version, from checkasm:
                               Cortex       A7     A8     A9    A53
      vp9_inv_adst_adst_4x4_add_neon:     3.39   5.83   4.17   4.01
      vp9_inv_adst_adst_8x8_add_neon:     3.79   4.86   4.23   3.98
      vp9_inv_adst_adst_16x16_add_neon:   3.33   4.36   4.11   4.16
      vp9_inv_dct_dct_4x4_add_neon:       4.06   6.16   4.59   4.46
      vp9_inv_dct_dct_8x8_add_neon:       4.61   6.01   4.98   4.86
      vp9_inv_dct_dct_16x16_add_neon:     3.35   3.44   3.36   3.79
      vp9_inv_dct_dct_32x32_add_neon:     3.89   3.50   3.79   4.42
      vp9_inv_wht_wht_4x4_add_neon:       3.22   5.13   3.53   3.77
      
      Thus, the speedup vs C code is around 3-6x.
      
      This is mostly marginally faster than the corresponding routines
      in libvpx on most cores, tested with their 32x32 idct (compared to
      vpx_idct32x32_1024_add_neon). These numbers are slightly in libvpx's
      favour since their version doesn't clear the input buffer like ours
      do (although the effect of that on the total runtime probably is
      negligible.)
      
                                 Cortex       A7       A8       A9      A53
      vp9_inv_dct_dct_32x32_add_neon:    18436.8  16874.1  14235.1  11988.9
      libvpx vpx_idct32x32_1024_add_neon 20789.0  13344.3  15049.9  13030.5
      
      Only on the Cortex A8, the libvpx function is faster. On the other cores,
      ours is slightly faster even though ours has got source block clearing
      integrated.
      Signed-off-by: 's avatarMartin Storsjö <martin@martin.st>
      a67ae670