On Wed, 13 Jan 2021, Reimar Döffinger wrote:
If building with MSVC tools, yes you're right that armasm.exe/armasm64.exe
takes a different syntax. But the gas-preprocessor tool (which is picked up
automatically by our configure, one just needs to make sure it's available)
handles expanding all
> If building with MSVC tools, yes you're right that armasm.exe/armasm64.exe
> takes a different syntax. But the gas-preprocessor tool (which is picked up
> automatically by our configure, one just needs to make sure it's available)
> handles expanding all the macros and rewriting directives int
Hi,
On Tue, 12 Jan 2021, Reimar Döffinger wrote:
I’m not sure it will discourage it more than having to write
the optimizations over and over, for Armv7 NEON, for Armv8 Linux,
for Armv8 Windows, then SVE/SVE2, who knows maybe Armv9
will also need a rewrite.
NEON code for armv8 windows and arm
> -Original Message-
> From: ffmpeg-devel On Behalf Of
> Lynne
> Sent: Tuesday, January 12, 2021 9:47 PM
> To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches de...@ffmpeg.org>
> Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] Add support for "omp simd" prag
> On 12 Jan 2021, at 21:46, Lynne wrote:
>
> Jan 12, 2021, 19:28 by reimar.doeffin...@gmx.de:
>
>> It’s almost 20%. At least for this combination of
>> codec and stream a large amount of time is spend in
>> non-DSP functions, so even hand-written assembler
>> won’t give you huge gains.
>>
> I
Jan 12, 2021, 19:28 by reimar.doeffin...@gmx.de:
>>
>> On 10 Jan 2021, at 19:55, Lynne wrote:
>>
>> Jan 10, 2021, 17:43 by reimar.doeffin...@gmx.de:
>>
>>> From: Reimar Döffinger
>>>
>>> real0m15.040s
>>> user0m18.874s (80.7% of original)
>>> sys 0m0.168s
>>>
>>
>> I think I have to
> On 12 Jan 2021, at 19:52, Soft Works wrote:
>
>
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: ffmpeg-devel On Behalf Of
>> reimar.doeffin...@gmx.de
>> Sent: Sunday, January 10, 2021 5:44 PM
>> To: ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
>> Cc: Reimar Döffinger
>> Subject: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] Add support fo
> -Original Message-
> From: ffmpeg-devel On Behalf Of
> reimar.doeffin...@gmx.de
> Sent: Sunday, January 10, 2021 5:44 PM
> To: ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
> Cc: Reimar Döffinger
> Subject: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] Add support for "omp simd" pragma.
>
> From: Reimar Döffinger
>
> This req
>
> On 10 Jan 2021, at 19:55, Lynne wrote:
>
> Jan 10, 2021, 17:43 by reimar.doeffin...@gmx.de:
>
>> From: Reimar Döffinger
>>
>> real0m15.040s
>> user0m18.874s (80.7% of original)
>> sys 0m0.168s
>>
>
> I think I have to disagree.
> The performance gains are marginal,
It’s alm
On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 1:26 AM Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote:
> Am So., 10. Jan. 2021 um 19:55 Uhr schrieb Lynne :
> >
> > Jan 10, 2021, 17:43 by reimar.doeffin...@gmx.de:
> >
> > > From: Reimar Döffinger
> > >
> > > This requests loops to be vectorized using SIMD
> > > instructions.
> > > The perform
Am So., 10. Jan. 2021 um 19:55 Uhr schrieb Lynne :
>
> Jan 10, 2021, 17:43 by reimar.doeffin...@gmx.de:
>
> > From: Reimar Döffinger
> >
> > This requests loops to be vectorized using SIMD
> > instructions.
> > The performance increase is far from hand-optimized
> > assembly but still significant
Jan 10, 2021, 17:43 by reimar.doeffin...@gmx.de:
> From: Reimar Döffinger
>
> This requests loops to be vectorized using SIMD
> instructions.
> The performance increase is far from hand-optimized
> assembly but still significant over the plain C version.
> Typical values are a 2-4x speedup where
12 matches
Mail list logo
