On 03/08/15 7:27 AM, Ronald S. Bultje wrote: > Hi, > > On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 2:41 AM, James Almer <jamr...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Only two functions that use xop multiply-accumulate instructions where the >> first operand is the same as the fourth actually took advantage of the >> macros. >> >> This further reduces differences with x264's x86inc. >> >> Signed-off-by: James Almer <jamr...@gmail.com> >> --- >> libavcodec/x86/flacdsp.asm | 9 +++++++++ >> libavutil/x86/x86inc.asm | 16 ++++++++++++++++ >> libavutil/x86/x86util.asm | 19 ------------------- >> libswresample/x86/resample.asm | 7 ++++++- >> 4 files changed, 31 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-) > > > OK. (I still think if we ever get more users of the macros, they could move > back to x86util.asm, but not necessary now.)
AMD dropped XOP for Zen, their post-Bulldozer architecture coming next year, and so far I'm apparently the only one that ever bothered to write XOP versions of existing functions for ffmpeg. I really doubt new code that uses these instructions for the specific case where first and four operand are the same will show up at all, or at least none where planning the instruction order in the non-XOP versions to reduce register dependency isn't a better idea. Pushed then, thanks. _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
