Thank you for your detailed explanation! :)
Ronald S. Bultje 于2024年12月5日周四 20:38写道：
> Hi,
>
> Christophe asked me to chime in.
>
> On Wed, Dec 4, 2024 at 4:14 AM wrote:
>
> > --- a/tests/checkasm/rv40dsp.c
> > +++ b/tests/checkasm/rv40dsp.c
> > @@ -27,7 +27,7 @@
> > #define randomize_buffers()
Hi,
Christophe asked me to chime in.
On Wed, Dec 4, 2024 at 4:14 AM wrote:
> --- a/tests/checkasm/rv40dsp.c
> +++ b/tests/checkasm/rv40dsp.c
> @@ -27,7 +27,7 @@
> #define randomize_buffers() \
> do { \
> for (int i = 0; i < 16*
Hello,
Le jeu. 5 déc. 2024 à 08:25, flow gg a écrit :
> I submitted a new patch: "checkasm/rv40dsp: cover more cases for rv40_bias"
> to test this situation.
My point is, that patch was fine, the one you talk about isn't.
> > Le mer. 4 déc. 2024 à 10:14, a écrit :
> > > @@ -27,7 +27,7 @@
> > >
Hi, the original issue I encountered was that FATE failed on RISC-V because
the assembly code didn't handle `rv40_bias` correctly.
I submitted a new patch: "checkasm/rv40dsp: cover more cases for rv40_bias"
to test this situation.
The value of `src` was indeed just copied from `h264_chroma_mc`. M
Hello,
Le mer. 4 déc. 2024 à 10:14, a écrit :
> @@ -27,7 +27,7 @@
> #define randomize_buffers() \
> do { \
> for (int i = 0; i < 16*18*2; i++)\
> -src[i] = rnd() & 0x3;\
> +src[i] = rnd() &
From: sunyuechi
---
tests/checkasm/rv40dsp.c | 6 +++---
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tests/checkasm/rv40dsp.c b/tests/checkasm/rv40dsp.c
index a1a873d430..8d2252116c 100644
--- a/tests/checkasm/rv40dsp.c
+++ b/tests/checkasm/rv40dsp.c
@@ -27,7 +27,7 @@
#define
