The swresample_ prefix is not for internal functions
Signed-off-by: James Almer <jamrial@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Michael Niedermayer <michaelni@gmx.at>
Prototypes are not needed anymore now that the x86 functions don't
include resample_template.c
The DO_RESAMPLE_ONE macro is removed for that same reason as well.
Signed-off-by: James Almer <jamrial@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Michael Niedermayer <michaelni@gmx.at>
Linear interpolation goes from 63 (llvm) or 58 (gcc) to 48 (yasm)
cycles/sample on 64bit, or from 66 (llvm/gcc) to 52 (yasm) cycles/
sample on 32bit. Bon-linear goes from 43 (llvm) or 38 (gcc) to
32 (yasm) cycles/sample on 64bit, or from 46 (llvm) or 44 (gcc) to
38 (yasm) cycles/sample on 32bit (all testing on OSX 10.9.2, llvm
5.1 and gcc 4.8/9).
Signed-off-by: Michael Niedermayer <michaelni@gmx.at>
Should fix compilation failures with MSVC and any other compiler
without inline asm support.
Signed-off-by: James Almer <jamrial@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Michael Niedermayer <michaelni@gmx.at>
DSP bits of swri_resample go into their own mini-DSP functions; DSP
init goes from a per-call branch in multiple_resample to a proper
DSP init routine; x86 bits go into x86/; swri_resample() moves out of
resample_template.c into resample.c because it's independent of DSP
code or sample type; multiple_resample() is simplified.
Signed-off-by: Michael Niedermayer <michaelni@gmx.at>
I don't see dst_incr/dst_incr_frac ever being changed from their
initial value (which is the inverse of this operation), so it seems
to me that this is a no-op.
Signed-off-by: Michael Niedermayer <michaelni@gmx.at>
I think there's an off-by-one in terms of the switchpoint where we
switch from dst_incr to ideal_dst_incr, I don't think that's a massive
issue, but just be aware of that. It's probably trivial to prevent but
I don't care.
Signed-off-by: Michael Niedermayer <michaelni@gmx.at>
I could not reproduce any off by 1 error, results are bit exact (michael)
This removes a branch at a performance-sensitive point (in the middle
of the loop). In fate-swr-resample-s32p-8000-2626, this makes the code
about 10% faster. It also simplifies the loops, allowing us to rewrite
it in yasm at some later point.
The compensation_distance != 0 code and index < 0 code are still kind
of hairy. For compensation_distance != 0, this should likely be handled
in the caller, so that it calls swri_resample twice (once until the
dst_incr switch-point, and once with the remainder of the samples). For
index < 0, the code should probably be rewritten to break out of the
loop once sample_index >= 0, and then resume (e.g. as a tail-call) to
the common or linear resampling loops.
Signed-off-by: Michael Niedermayer <michaelni@gmx.at>
This should avoid slight differences in the output causes by input
size alignment differences between archs
Signed-off-by: Michael Niedermayer <michaelni@gmx.at>
Related to CID1197063
The limit choosen is arbitrary and much larger than what makes sense.
It avoids the need for checking arithmetic operations with the length for overflow
Signed-off-by: Michael Niedermayer <michaelni@gmx.at>
Timothy Gu
James Almer
Ronald S. Bultje
Michael Niedermayer
Lou Logan
Matt Oliver