Hi, there. Is there any comment? I think i did the right fix.
Yingming Fan
> On 8 Mar 2018, at 4:17 PM, Hendrik Leppkes <h.lepp...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> 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
_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-devel mailing list
ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
