On 01.11.2016 02:04, Michael Niedermayer wrote: > On Tue, Nov 01, 2016 at 12:27:00AM +0100, Andreas Cadhalpun wrote: >> The checkasm test fails, see trac ticket 5508. >> >> Also, the following tests fail due to this: >> fate-vsynth1-dnxhd-2k-hr-hq fate-vsynth1-dnxhd-edge1-hr >> fate-vsynth1-dnxhd-edge2-hr fate-vsynth1-dnxhd-edge3-hr >> fate-vsynth1-dnxhd-hr-sq-mov fate-vsynth1-dnxhd-hr-hq-mov >> fate-vsynth2-dnxhd-2k-hr-hq fate-vsynth2-dnxhd-edge1-hr >> fate-vsynth2-dnxhd-edge2-hr fate-vsynth2-dnxhd-edge3-hr >> fate-vsynth2-dnxhd-hr-sq-mov fate-vsynth2-dnxhd-hr-hq-mov >> fate-vsynth3-dnxhd-2k-hr-hq fate-vsynth3-dnxhd-edge1-hr >> fate-vsynth3-dnxhd-edge2-hr fate-vsynth3-dnxhd-edge3-hr >> fate-vsynth3-dnxhd-hr-sq-mov fate-vsynth3-dnxhd-hr-hq-mov >> >> Signed-off-by: Andreas Cadhalpun <andreas.cadhal...@googlemail.com> >> --- >> >> Just disabling the checkasm_check_pixblockdsp test for ppc64be, >> as was done in commit e5d434 for release/3.1, does not make much sense, >> as the altivec functions actually don't work... > > has this been tested with actual hw or an emulator ?
The tests failed on the Debian buildd [1] and I could reproduce the exact same failures with qemu. The patch is only tested with qemu. > is this a regression ? if so since when ? Well, the commit e5d434 was never on master, but in release/3.1. And the failing dnxhd tests are new: eb5f4b1 tests/fate/vcodec: add dnxhr mov tests 44ac2b9 tests/fate/vcodec: add dnxhr edge tests 6108cb2 tests/fate: add dnxhr encoding tests So this altivec code probably never worked on ppc64be, it was just not tested. Best regards, Andreas 1: https://buildd.debian.org/status/fetch.php?pkg=ffmpeg&arch=ppc64&ver=7%3A3.2-1&stamp=1477927610 _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
