1. 16 Nov, 2016 7 commits
  2. 15 Nov, 2016 16 commits
    • Michael Niedermayer's avatar
      avcodec/rv40: Test remaining space in loop of get_dimension() · 1546d487
      Michael Niedermayer authored
      Fixes infinite loop
      Fixes: 178/fuzz-3-ffmpeg_VIDEO_AV_CODEC_ID_RV40_fuzzer
      
      Found-by: continuous fuzzing process https://github.com/google/oss-fuzz/tree/master/targets/ffmpegSigned-off-by: 's avatarMichael Niedermayer <michael@niedermayer.cc>
      1546d487
    • Andreas Cadhalpun's avatar
      mlz: limit next_code to data buffer size · 1abcd972
      Andreas Cadhalpun authored
      This fixes a heap-buffer-overflow detected by AddressSanitizer.
      Reviewed-by: 's avatarMichael Niedermayer <michael@niedermayer.cc>
      Signed-off-by: 's avatarAndreas Cadhalpun <Andreas.Cadhalpun@googlemail.com>
      1abcd972
    • Martin Storsjö's avatar
      aarch64: vp9: Implement NEON loop filters · f1212e47
      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.
      
      This is an adapted cherry-pick from libav commits
      9d2afd1e and
      31756abe.
      Signed-off-by: 's avatarRonald S. Bultje <rsbultje@gmail.com>
      f1212e47
    • Martin Storsjö's avatar
      aarch64: vp9: Add NEON itxfm routines · f43079e1
      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.
      
      This is an adapted cherry-pick from libav commit
      3c9546df.
      Signed-off-by: 's avatarRonald S. Bultje <rsbultje@gmail.com>
      f43079e1
    • Martin Storsjö's avatar
      aarch64: vp9: Add NEON optimizations of VP9 MC functions · 1f7801c2
      Martin Storsjö authored
      This work is sponsored by, and copyright, Google.
      
      These are ported from the ARM version; it is essentially a 1:1
      port with no extra added features, but with some hand tuning
      (especially for the plain copy/avg functions). The ARM version
      isn't very register starved to begin with, so there's not much
      to be gained from having more spare registers here - we only
      avoid having to clobber callee-saved registers.
      
      Examples of runtimes vs the 32 bit version, on a Cortex A53:
                                           ARM   AArch64
      vp9_avg4_neon:                      27.2      23.7
      vp9_avg8_neon:                      56.5      54.7
      vp9_avg16_neon:                    169.9     167.4
      vp9_avg32_neon:                    585.8     585.2
      vp9_avg64_neon:                   2460.3    2294.7
      vp9_avg_8tap_smooth_4h_neon:       132.7     125.2
      vp9_avg_8tap_smooth_4hv_neon:      478.8     442.0
      vp9_avg_8tap_smooth_4v_neon:       126.0      93.7
      vp9_avg_8tap_smooth_8h_neon:       241.7     234.2
      vp9_avg_8tap_smooth_8hv_neon:      690.9     646.5
      vp9_avg_8tap_smooth_8v_neon:       245.0     205.5
      vp9_avg_8tap_smooth_64h_neon:    11273.2   11280.1
      vp9_avg_8tap_smooth_64hv_neon:   22980.6   22184.1
      vp9_avg_8tap_smooth_64v_neon:    11549.7   10781.1
      vp9_put4_neon:                      18.0      17.2
      vp9_put8_neon:                      40.2      37.7
      vp9_put16_neon:                     97.4      99.5
      vp9_put32_neon/armv8:              346.0     307.4
      vp9_put64_neon/armv8:             1319.0    1107.5
      vp9_put_8tap_smooth_4h_neon:       126.7     118.2
      vp9_put_8tap_smooth_4hv_neon:      465.7     434.0
      vp9_put_8tap_smooth_4v_neon:       113.0      86.5
      vp9_put_8tap_smooth_8h_neon:       229.7     221.6
      vp9_put_8tap_smooth_8hv_neon:      658.9     621.3
      vp9_put_8tap_smooth_8v_neon:       215.0     187.5
      vp9_put_8tap_smooth_64h_neon:    10636.7   10627.8
      vp9_put_8tap_smooth_64hv_neon:   21076.8   21026.9
      vp9_put_8tap_smooth_64v_neon:     9635.0    9632.4
      
      These are generally about as fast as the corresponding ARM
      routines on the same CPU (at least on the A53), in most cases
      marginally faster.
      
      The speedup vs C code is pretty much the same as for the 32 bit
      case; on the A53 it's around 6-13x for ther larger 8tap filters.
      The exact speedup varies a little, since the C versions generally
      don't end up exactly as slow/fast as on 32 bit.
      
      This is an adapted cherry-pick from libav commit
      383d96aa.
      Signed-off-by: 's avatarRonald S. Bultje <rsbultje@gmail.com>
      1f7801c2
    • Martin Storsjö's avatar
      aarch64: Add an offset parameter to the movrel macro · 7fe898db
      Martin Storsjö authored
      With apple tools, the linker fails with errors like these, if the
      offset is negative:
      
      ld: in section __TEXT,__text reloc 8: symbol index out of range for architecture arm64
      
      This is cherry-picked from libav commit
      c44a8a3e.
      Signed-off-by: 's avatarRonald S. Bultje <rsbultje@gmail.com>
      7fe898db
    • Martin Storsjö's avatar
      arm: vp9: Add NEON loop filters · 6bec60a6
      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).
      
      This is an adapted cherry-pick from libav commit
      dd299a2d.
      Signed-off-by: 's avatarRonald S. Bultje <rsbultje@gmail.com>
      6bec60a6
    • Martin Storsjö's avatar
      arm: vp9: Add NEON itxfm routines · b4dc7c34
      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.
      
      This is an adapted cherry-pick from libav commits
      a67ae670 and
      52d196fb.
      Signed-off-by: 's avatarRonald S. Bultje <rsbultje@gmail.com>
      b4dc7c34
    • Martin Storsjö's avatar
      arm: vp9: Add NEON optimizations of VP9 MC functions · 68caef9d
      Martin Storsjö authored
      This work is sponsored by, and copyright, Google.
      
      The filter coefficients are signed values, where the product of the
      multiplication with one individual filter coefficient doesn't
      overflow a 16 bit signed value (the largest filter coefficient is
      127). But when the products are accumulated, the resulting sum can
      overflow the 16 bit signed range. Instead of accumulating in 32 bit,
      we accumulate the largest product (either index 3 or 4) last with a
      saturated addition.
      
      (The VP8 MC asm does something similar, but slightly simpler, by
      accumulating each half of the filter separately. In the VP9 MC
      filters, each half of the filter can also overflow though, so the
      largest component has to be handled individually.)
      
      Examples of relative speedup compared to the C version, from checkasm:
                             Cortex      A7     A8     A9    A53
      vp9_avg4_neon:                   1.71   1.15   1.42   1.49
      vp9_avg8_neon:                   2.51   3.63   3.14   2.58
      vp9_avg16_neon:                  2.95   6.76   3.01   2.84
      vp9_avg32_neon:                  3.29   6.64   2.85   3.00
      vp9_avg64_neon:                  3.47   6.67   3.14   2.80
      vp9_avg_8tap_smooth_4h_neon:     3.22   4.73   2.76   4.67
      vp9_avg_8tap_smooth_4hv_neon:    3.67   4.76   3.28   4.71
      vp9_avg_8tap_smooth_4v_neon:     5.52   7.60   4.60   6.31
      vp9_avg_8tap_smooth_8h_neon:     6.22   9.04   5.12   9.32
      vp9_avg_8tap_smooth_8hv_neon:    6.38   8.21   5.72   8.17
      vp9_avg_8tap_smooth_8v_neon:     9.22  12.66   8.15  11.10
      vp9_avg_8tap_smooth_64h_neon:    7.02  10.23   5.54  11.58
      vp9_avg_8tap_smooth_64hv_neon:   6.76   9.46   5.93   9.40
      vp9_avg_8tap_smooth_64v_neon:   10.76  14.13   9.46  13.37
      vp9_put4_neon:                   1.11   1.47   1.00   1.21
      vp9_put8_neon:                   1.23   2.17   1.94   1.48
      vp9_put16_neon:                  1.63   4.02   1.73   1.97
      vp9_put32_neon:                  1.56   4.92   2.00   1.96
      vp9_put64_neon:                  2.10   5.28   2.03   2.35
      vp9_put_8tap_smooth_4h_neon:     3.11   4.35   2.63   4.35
      vp9_put_8tap_smooth_4hv_neon:    3.67   4.69   3.25   4.71
      vp9_put_8tap_smooth_4v_neon:     5.45   7.27   4.49   6.52
      vp9_put_8tap_smooth_8h_neon:     5.97   8.18   4.81   8.56
      vp9_put_8tap_smooth_8hv_neon:    6.39   7.90   5.64   8.15
      vp9_put_8tap_smooth_8v_neon:     9.03  11.84   8.07  11.51
      vp9_put_8tap_smooth_64h_neon:    6.78   9.48   4.88  10.89
      vp9_put_8tap_smooth_64hv_neon:   6.99   8.87   5.94   9.56
      vp9_put_8tap_smooth_64v_neon:   10.69  13.30   9.43  14.34
      
      For the larger 8tap filters, the speedup vs C code is around 5-14x.
      
      This is significantly faster than libvpx's implementation of the same
      functions, at least when comparing the put_8tap_smooth_64 functions
      (compared to vpx_convolve8_horiz_neon and vpx_convolve8_vert_neon from
      libvpx).
      
      Absolute runtimes from checkasm:
                                Cortex      A7        A8        A9       A53
      vp9_put_8tap_smooth_64h_neon:    20150.3   14489.4   19733.6   10863.7
      libvpx vpx_convolve8_horiz_neon: 52623.3   19736.4   21907.7   25027.7
      
      vp9_put_8tap_smooth_64v_neon:    14455.0   12303.9   13746.4    9628.9
      libvpx vpx_convolve8_vert_neon:  42090.0   17706.2   17659.9   16941.2
      
      Thus, on the A9, the horizontal filter is only marginally faster than
      libvpx, while our version is significantly faster on the other cores,
      and the vertical filter is significantly faster on all cores. The
      difference is especially large on the A7.
      
      The libvpx implementation does the accumulation in 32 bit, which
      probably explains most of the differences.
      
      This is an adapted cherry-pick from libav commits
      ffbd1d2b,
      392caa65,
      557c1675 and
      11623217.
      Signed-off-by: 's avatarRonald S. Bultje <rsbultje@gmail.com>
      68caef9d
    • Martin Storsjö's avatar
      arm: Clear the gp register alias at the end of functions · 86c5a23e
      Martin Storsjö authored
      We reset .Lpic_gp to zero at the start of each function, which means
      that the logic within movrelx for clearing gp when necessary will
      be missed.
      
      This fixes using movrelx in different functions with a different
      helper register.
      
      This is cherry-picked from libav commit
      824e8c28.
      Signed-off-by: 's avatarRonald S. Bultje <rsbultje@gmail.com>
      86c5a23e
    • Martin Storsjö's avatar
      vp9dsp: Deduplicate the subpel filters · 6409e9b6
      Martin Storsjö authored
      Make them aligned, to allow efficient access to them from simd.
      
      This is an adapted cherry-pick from libav commit
      a4cfcddc.
      Signed-off-by: 's avatarRonald S. Bultje <rsbultje@gmail.com>
      6409e9b6
    • Michael Niedermayer's avatar
      avcodec/ituh263dec: Avoid spending a long time in slice sync · 2baf36ca
      Michael Niedermayer authored
      Fixes: 177/fuzz-3-ffmpeg_VIDEO_AV_CODEC_ID_FLV1_fuzzer
      
      Found-by: continuous fuzzing process https://github.com/google/oss-fuzz/tree/master/targets/ffmpegSigned-off-by: 's avatarMichael Niedermayer <michael@niedermayer.cc>
      2baf36ca
    • Ronald S. Bultje's avatar
      vp9: add avx2 iadst16 implementations. · 83a139e3
      Ronald S. Bultje authored
      Also a small cosmetic change to the avx2 idct16 version to make it
      explicit that one of the arguments to the write-out macros is unused
      for >=avx2 (it uses pmovzxbw instead of punpcklbw).
      83a139e3
    • Michael Niedermayer's avatar
    • Michael Niedermayer's avatar
      avcodec/movtextdec: Fix tsmb_size check==0 check · a6099057
      Michael Niedermayer authored
      Fixes: 173/fuzz-3-ffmpeg_SUBTITLE_AV_CODEC_ID_MOV_TEXT_fuzzer
      
      Found-by: continuous fuzzing process https://github.com/google/oss-fuzz/tree/master/targets/ffmpegSigned-off-by: 's avatarMichael Niedermayer <michael@niedermayer.cc>
      a6099057
    • Michael Niedermayer's avatar
  3. 14 Nov, 2016 17 commits