On 7/31/2017 5:33 PM, foo86 wrote: > --- > tests/fate/dca.mak | 36 ++ > tests/ref/fate/dca-core-14be | 1 + > tests/ref/fate/dca-core-14le | 1 + > tests/ref/fate/dca-core-16be | 1 + > tests/ref/fate/dca-core-16le | 1 + > tests/ref/fate/dca-core-dmix | 1 + > tests/ref/fate/dca-core-size | 1 + > tests/ref/fate/dca-core-x96 | 1 + > tests/ref/fate/dca-core-xch | 1 + > tests/ref/fate/dca-core-xxch | 1 + > tests/ref/fate/dca-xll-ltrt | 1 + > tests/ref/fate/dca-xll-pbr | 836 > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > tests/ref/fate/dca-xll-read | 510 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > tests/ref/fate/dca-xll-sync | 810 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > 14 files changed, 2202 insertions(+) > create mode 100644 tests/ref/fate/dca-core-14be > create mode 100644 tests/ref/fate/dca-core-14le > create mode 100644 tests/ref/fate/dca-core-16be > create mode 100644 tests/ref/fate/dca-core-16le > create mode 100644 tests/ref/fate/dca-core-dmix > create mode 100644 tests/ref/fate/dca-core-size > create mode 100644 tests/ref/fate/dca-core-x96 > create mode 100644 tests/ref/fate/dca-core-xch > create mode 100644 tests/ref/fate/dca-core-xxch > create mode 100644 tests/ref/fate/dca-xll-ltrt > create mode 100644 tests/ref/fate/dca-xll-pbr > create mode 100644 tests/ref/fate/dca-xll-read > create mode 100644 tests/ref/fate/dca-xll-sync > > diff --git a/tests/fate/dca.mak b/tests/fate/dca.mak > index b1681c6b59..563b83695f 100644 > --- a/tests/fate/dca.mak > +++ b/tests/fate/dca.mak > @@ -67,9 +67,45 @@ fate-dca-core: CMD = pcm -i $(TARGET_SAMPLES)/dts/dts.ts > fate-dca-core: CMP = oneoff > fate-dca-core: REF = $(SAMPLES)/dts/dts.pcm > > +# lossy fixed point tests > +DCA_FIXED_POINT = dca-core-14be dca-core-14le dca-core-16be dca-core-16le > dca-core-size dca-core-x96 dca-core-xch dca-core-xxch > + > +define FATE_DCA_FIXED_POINT > +FATE_DCA-$(call DEMDEC, DTS, DCA) += fate-$(1) > +fate-$(1): CMD = md5 -flags +bitexact -i $(TARGET_SAMPLES)/dts/$(1) -f s24le > +endef > + > +$(foreach N,$(DCA_FIXED_POINT),$(eval $(call FATE_DCA_FIXED_POINT,$(N)))) > + > +# lossy fixed point downmix test > +FATE_DCA-$(call DEMDEC, DTS, DCA) += fate-dca-core-dmix > +fate-dca-core-dmix: CMD = md5 -flags +bitexact -request_channel_layout 0x3 > -i $(TARGET_SAMPLES)/dts/dca-core-xxch -f s24le > + > FATE_DCA-$(call DEMDEC, DTS, DCA) += fate-dca-xll > fate-dca-xll: CMD = md5 -i $(TARGET_SAMPLES)/dts/master_audio_7.1_24bit.dts > -f s24le > > +FATE_DCA-$(call DEMDEC, DTS, DCA) += fate-dca-xll-ltrt > +fate-dca-xll-ltrt: CMD = md5 -err_detect crccheck -i > $(TARGET_SAMPLES)/dts/dca-xll-ltrt -f s16le
Any reason why these are using md5 instead of framemd5? > + > +FATE_DCA-$(call DEMDEC, DTS, DCA) += fate-dca-xll-pbr > +fate-dca-xll-pbr: CMD = framemd5 -err_detect crccheck -i > $(TARGET_SAMPLES)/dts/dca-xll-pbr -c:a pcm_s16le > + > +FATE_DCA-$(call DEMDEC, DTS, DCA) += fate-dca-xll-read > +fate-dca-xll-read: CMD = framemd5 -err_detect crccheck -i > $(TARGET_SAMPLES)/dts/dca-xll-read -c:a pcm_s24le > + > +FATE_DCA-$(call DEMDEC, DTS, DCA) += fate-dca-xll-sync > +fate-dca-xll-sync: CMD = framemd5 -err_detect crccheck -i > $(TARGET_SAMPLES)/dts/dca-xll-sync -c:a pcm_s24le Can you limit these to only a bunch of audio frames, the minimum amount necessary to get the intended code coverage, in order to avoid big samples and ref files with hundreds of lines? Also because calculating md5 is expensive. Notice how the first tests added using your samples (dcadec-suite folder) are all like six frames each. Also, the naming scheme is different and you're placing them outside of the dcadec-suite folder. But that's not as important as the above. > + > +FATE_DCA-$(call DEMDEC, DTS, DCA) += fate-dca-lbr > +fate-dca-lbr: CMD = pcm -err_detect crccheck -i $(TARGET_SAMPLES)/dts/dca-lbr > +fate-dca-lbr: CMP = oneoff > +fate-dca-lbr: REF = $(SAMPLES)/dts/dca-lbr.pcm > + > +FATE_DCA-$(call DEMDEC, DTS, DCA) += fate-dca-lbr-256 > +fate-dca-lbr-256: CMD = pcm -err_detect crccheck -i > $(TARGET_SAMPLES)/dts/dca-lbr-256 > +fate-dca-lbr-256: CMP = oneoff > +fate-dca-lbr-256: REF = $(SAMPLES)/dts/dca-lbr-256.pcm Did you create the pcm files using your decoder, or created the lbr samples from already existing pcm files? If the former, with what kind of build and decoder settings? I ask because, long ago when you first wrote the lbr decoder, you gave me a bunch of samples i tried to use to write some tests. I used a x86_32 build and forced no handwritten assembly (so it's all x87 floats) to create pcm reference files, and the result was that x86_64 builds (using sse floats, hand written assembly or otherwise) would unexpectedly fail the tests by a huge error margin. I narrowed the problem down to dcadsp's lbr_bank_c. That function compiled with x87 floats and sse floats would give different results, and i couldn't figure out why. Maybe it was the compiler i used back then (mingw-w64 gcc 5 i think). For that matter, the lbr samples you gave me back then were one mono, one stereo and one 5.1, which was more varied than the two stereo ones you're using here. I can upload them somewhere if you don't have them anymore. _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
