On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 9:16 AM, Paul B Mahol <one...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 3/8/18, Yingming Fan <yingming...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> From: Yingming Fan <yingming...@gmail.com>
>>
>> ---
>> We have 8 10 and 12 SIMD codes, but previous checkasm hevc_idct only test 8
>> and 10 bit depth.
>>
>> tests/checkasm/hevc_idct.c | 4 ++--
>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/tests/checkasm/hevc_idct.c b/tests/checkasm/hevc_idct.c
>> index eea712101d..c20111c2df 100644
>> --- a/tests/checkasm/hevc_idct.c
>> +++ b/tests/checkasm/hevc_idct.c
>> @@ -87,7 +87,7 @@ void checkasm_check_hevc_idct(void)
>> {
>> int bit_depth;
>>
>> - for (bit_depth = 8; bit_depth <= 10; bit_depth++) {
>> + for (bit_depth = 8; bit_depth <= 12; bit_depth += 2) {
>> HEVCDSPContext h;
>>
>> ff_hevc_dsp_init(&h, bit_depth);
>> @@ -95,7 +95,7 @@ void checkasm_check_hevc_idct(void)
>> }
>> report("idct_dc");
>>
>> - for (bit_depth = 8; bit_depth <= 10; bit_depth++) {
>> + for (bit_depth = 8; bit_depth <= 12; bit_depth += 2) {
>> HEVCDSPContext h;
>>
>> ff_hevc_dsp_init(&h, bit_depth);
>
> Isn't this dropping 9 case?
It is, but we don't have any optimizations for 9 anyway, so there is
nothing to test.
- Hendrik
_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-devel mailing list
ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
