Le sunnuntaina 17. joulukuuta 2023, 23.57.50 EET Martin Storsjö a écrit : > > Rounding errors would not cause a constant gap across the different test > > cases. This is most likely an off-by-one in the x86 code. I don't know if > > this is a bug in the x86 code, or the test case being a little loose with > > input parameters, and I have neither time, nor motivation not to mention > > skills to figure that out, so there will be no test cases for this > > function form me afterall. > > FWIW, we've had these situations elsewhere before as well, in swscale, > where the existing x86 assembly mismatches the C code in nontrivial ways, > and we have new assembly (aarch64 in that case) that is missing a test > (even if one was written) due to this. > > First I considered if we should collect these extra checkasm tests in some > branch somewhere, so they aren't lost, as they are useful when working on > assembly on other architectures. > > But rather than having the code rot, forgotten in a stray branch > somewhere, I wonder if we should just go ahead and merge it with an #if > !ARCH_X86 or something, together with a notable FIXME comment.
I'd certainly welcome more checkasm that literally anyone other than me wrote. If the divergence in the X86 code is simply due to optimising an inexact algorithm differently, that seems fine. But if it is a case that the X86 code is demonstrably buggy, I think that it should be commented out or removed. That would not only fix a bug, but also put stronger incentives for X68 fanboys to actually fix it. Worst case, the optimisation has become meaningless and we have actually fixed a bug. Though I don't know which case this nor your swscale tests are. -- レミ・デニ-クールモン http://www.remlab.net/ _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email ffmpeg-devel-requ...@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".
