This work is sponsored by, and copyright, Google.
This is similar to the arm version, but due to the larger registers
on aarch64, we can do 8 pixels at a time for all filter sizes.
Examples of runtimes vs the 32 bit version, on a Cortex A53:
ARM AArch64
vp9_loop_filter_h_4_8_10bpp_neon: 213.2 172.6
vp9_loop_filter_h_8_8_10bpp_neon: 281.2 244.2
vp9_loop_filter_h_16_8_10bpp_neon: 657.0 444.5
vp9_loop_filter_h_16_16_10bpp_neon: 1280.4 877.7
vp9_loop_filter_mix2_h_44_16_10bpp_neon: 397.7 358.0
vp9_loop_filter_mix2_h_48_16_10bpp_neon: 465.7 429.0
vp9_loop_filter_mix2_h_84_16_10bpp_neon: 465.7 428.0
vp9_loop_filter_mix2_h_88_16_10bpp_neon: 533.7 499.0
vp9_loop_filter_mix2_v_44_16_10bpp_neon: 271.5 244.0
vp9_loop_filter_mix2_v_48_16_10bpp_neon: 330.0 305.0
vp9_loop_filter_mix2_v_84_16_10bpp_neon: 329.0 306.0
vp9_loop_filter_mix2_v_88_16_10bpp_neon: 386.0 365.0
vp9_loop_filter_v_4_8_10bpp_neon: 150.0 115.2
vp9_loop_filter_v_8_8_10bpp_neon: 209.0 175.5
vp9_loop_filter_v_16_8_10bpp_neon: 492.7 345.2
vp9_loop_filter_v_16_16_10bpp_neon: 951.0 682.7
This is significantly faster than the ARM version in almost
all cases except for the mix2 functions.
Based on START_TIMER/STOP_TIMER wrapping around a few individual
functions, the speedup vs C code is around 2-3x.
Signed-off-by: Martin Storsjö <martin@martin.st>
This work is sponsored by, and copyright, Google.
Compared to the arm version, on aarch64 we can keep the full 8x8
transform in registers, and for 16x16 and 32x32, we can process
it in slices of 4 pixels instead of 2.
Examples of runtimes vs the 32 bit version, on a Cortex A53:
ARM AArch64
vp9_inv_adst_adst_4x4_sub4_add_10_neon: 111.0 109.7
vp9_inv_adst_adst_8x8_sub8_add_10_neon: 914.0 733.5
vp9_inv_adst_adst_16x16_sub16_add_10_neon: 5184.0 3745.7
vp9_inv_dct_dct_4x4_sub1_add_10_neon: 65.0 65.7
vp9_inv_dct_dct_4x4_sub4_add_10_neon: 100.0 96.7
vp9_inv_dct_dct_8x8_sub1_add_10_neon: 111.0 119.7
vp9_inv_dct_dct_8x8_sub8_add_10_neon: 618.0 494.7
vp9_inv_dct_dct_16x16_sub1_add_10_neon: 295.1 284.6
vp9_inv_dct_dct_16x16_sub2_add_10_neon: 2303.2 1883.9
vp9_inv_dct_dct_16x16_sub8_add_10_neon: 2984.8 2189.3
vp9_inv_dct_dct_16x16_sub16_add_10_neon: 3890.0 2799.4
vp9_inv_dct_dct_32x32_sub1_add_10_neon: 1044.4 1012.7
vp9_inv_dct_dct_32x32_sub2_add_10_neon: 13333.7 9695.1
vp9_inv_dct_dct_32x32_sub16_add_10_neon: 18531.3 12459.8
vp9_inv_dct_dct_32x32_sub32_add_10_neon: 24470.7 16160.2
vp9_inv_wht_wht_4x4_sub4_add_10_neon: 83.0 79.7
The larger transforms are significantly faster than the corresponding
ARM versions.
The speedup vs C code is smaller than in 32 bit mode, probably
because the 64 bit intermediates in the C code can be expressed
more efficiently in aarch64.
Signed-off-by: Martin Storsjö <martin@martin.st>
This work is sponsored by, and copyright, Google.
This has mostly got the same differences to the 8 bit version as
in the arm version. For the horizontal filters, we do 16 pixels
in parallel as well. For the 8 pixel wide vertical filters, we can
accumulate 4 rows before storing, just as in the 8 bit version.
Examples of runtimes vs the 32 bit version, on a Cortex A53:
ARM AArch64
vp9_avg4_10bpp_neon: 35.7 30.7
vp9_avg8_10bpp_neon: 93.5 84.7
vp9_avg16_10bpp_neon: 324.4 296.6
vp9_avg32_10bpp_neon: 1236.5 1148.2
vp9_avg64_10bpp_neon: 4639.6 4571.1
vp9_avg_8tap_smooth_4h_10bpp_neon: 130.0 128.0
vp9_avg_8tap_smooth_4hv_10bpp_neon: 440.0 440.5
vp9_avg_8tap_smooth_4v_10bpp_neon: 114.0 105.5
vp9_avg_8tap_smooth_8h_10bpp_neon: 327.0 314.0
vp9_avg_8tap_smooth_8hv_10bpp_neon: 918.7 865.4
vp9_avg_8tap_smooth_8v_10bpp_neon: 330.0 300.2
vp9_avg_8tap_smooth_16h_10bpp_neon: 1187.5 1155.5
vp9_avg_8tap_smooth_16hv_10bpp_neon: 2663.1 2591.0
vp9_avg_8tap_smooth_16v_10bpp_neon: 1107.4 1078.3
vp9_avg_8tap_smooth_64h_10bpp_neon: 17754.6 17454.7
vp9_avg_8tap_smooth_64hv_10bpp_neon: 33285.2 33001.5
vp9_avg_8tap_smooth_64v_10bpp_neon: 16066.9 16048.6
vp9_put4_10bpp_neon: 25.5 21.7
vp9_put8_10bpp_neon: 56.0 52.0
vp9_put16_10bpp_neon/armv8: 183.0 163.1
vp9_put32_10bpp_neon/armv8: 678.6 563.1
vp9_put64_10bpp_neon/armv8: 2679.9 2195.8
vp9_put_8tap_smooth_4h_10bpp_neon: 120.0 118.0
vp9_put_8tap_smooth_4hv_10bpp_neon: 435.2 435.0
vp9_put_8tap_smooth_4v_10bpp_neon: 107.0 98.2
vp9_put_8tap_smooth_8h_10bpp_neon: 303.0 290.0
vp9_put_8tap_smooth_8hv_10bpp_neon: 893.7 828.7
vp9_put_8tap_smooth_8v_10bpp_neon: 305.5 263.5
vp9_put_8tap_smooth_16h_10bpp_neon: 1089.1 1059.2
vp9_put_8tap_smooth_16hv_10bpp_neon: 2578.8 2452.4
vp9_put_8tap_smooth_16v_10bpp_neon: 1009.5 933.5
vp9_put_8tap_smooth_64h_10bpp_neon: 16223.4 15918.6
vp9_put_8tap_smooth_64hv_10bpp_neon: 32153.0 31016.2
vp9_put_8tap_smooth_64v_10bpp_neon: 14516.5 13748.1
These are generally about as fast as the corresponding ARM
routines on the same CPU (at least on the A53), in most cases
marginally faster.
The speedup vs C code is around 4-9x.
Signed-off-by: Martin Storsjö <martin@martin.st>
This work is sponsored by, and copyright, Google.
This is more in line with how it will be extended for more bitdepths.
Signed-off-by: Martin Storsjö <martin@martin.st>
This work is sponsored by, and copyright, Google.
Previously all subpartitions except the eob=1 (DC) case ran with
the same runtime:
vp9_inv_dct_dct_16x16_sub16_add_neon: 1373.2
vp9_inv_dct_dct_32x32_sub32_add_neon: 8089.0
By skipping individual 8x16 or 8x32 pixel slices in the first pass,
we reduce the runtime of these functions like this:
vp9_inv_dct_dct_16x16_sub1_add_neon: 235.3
vp9_inv_dct_dct_16x16_sub2_add_neon: 1036.7
vp9_inv_dct_dct_16x16_sub4_add_neon: 1036.7
vp9_inv_dct_dct_16x16_sub8_add_neon: 1036.7
vp9_inv_dct_dct_16x16_sub12_add_neon: 1372.1
vp9_inv_dct_dct_16x16_sub16_add_neon: 1372.1
vp9_inv_dct_dct_32x32_sub1_add_neon: 555.1
vp9_inv_dct_dct_32x32_sub2_add_neon: 5190.2
vp9_inv_dct_dct_32x32_sub4_add_neon: 5180.0
vp9_inv_dct_dct_32x32_sub8_add_neon: 5183.1
vp9_inv_dct_dct_32x32_sub12_add_neon: 6161.5
vp9_inv_dct_dct_32x32_sub16_add_neon: 6155.5
vp9_inv_dct_dct_32x32_sub20_add_neon: 7136.3
vp9_inv_dct_dct_32x32_sub24_add_neon: 7128.4
vp9_inv_dct_dct_32x32_sub28_add_neon: 8098.9
vp9_inv_dct_dct_32x32_sub32_add_neon: 8098.8
I.e. in general a very minor overhead for the full subpartition case due
to the additional cmps, but a significant speedup for the cases when we
only need to process a small part of the actual input data.
This is cherrypicked from libav commits
cad42fadcd and
a0c443a398.
Signed-off-by: Michael Niedermayer <michael@niedermayer.cc>
The clobbering tests in checkasm are only invoked when testing
correctness, so this bug didn't show up when benchmarking the
dc-only version.
This is cherrypicked from libav commit
4d960a1185.
Signed-off-by: Michael Niedermayer <michael@niedermayer.cc>
The latter is 1 cycle faster on a cortex-53 and since the operands are
bytewise (or larger) bitmask (impossible to overflow to zero) both are
equivalent.
This is cherrypicked from libav commit
e7ae8f7a71.
Signed-off-by: Michael Niedermayer <michael@niedermayer.cc>
Since aarch64 has enough free general purpose registers use them to
branch to the appropiate storage code. 1-2 cycles faster for the
functions using loop_filter 8/16, ... on a cortex-a53. Mixed results
(up to 2 cycles faster/slower) on a cortex-a57.
This is cherrypicked from libav commit
d7595de0b2.
Signed-off-by: Michael Niedermayer <michael@niedermayer.cc>
Prep work for the next commit, which will add a new FFT algorithm
which makes the iMDCT over 3x faster than it is currently (standalone,
the FFT is with some framesizes over 10x faster).
The new FFT algorithm uses the already thouroughly SIMD'd power of two
FFT which already has SIMD for AArch64, so users of that platform will
still see an improvement.
The previous FFT+SIMD was barely 2.5x faster than the C versions on these
platforms.
Signed-off-by: Rostislav Pehlivanov <atomnuker@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Martin Storsjö <martin@martin.st>
(cherry picked from commit 6a62795d40)
Cherry pick Suggested-by: Martin Storsjö
This should fix the build failure on macosx
Signed-off-by: Michael Niedermayer <michael@niedermayer.cc>
This work is sponsored by, and copyright, Google.
These are ported from the ARM version; thanks to the larger
amount of registers available, we can do the loop filters with
16 pixels at a time. The implementation is fully templated, with
a single macro which can generate versions for both 8 and
16 pixels wide, for both 4, 8 and 16 pixels loop filters
(and the 4/8 mixed versions as well).
For the 8 pixel wide versions, it is pretty close in speed (the
v_4_8 and v_8_8 filters are the best examples of this; the h_4_8
and h_8_8 filters seem to get some gain in the load/transpose/store
part). For the 16 pixels wide ones, we get a speedup of around
1.2-1.4x compared to the 32 bit version.
Examples of runtimes vs the 32 bit version, on a Cortex A53:
ARM AArch64
vp9_loop_filter_h_4_8_neon: 144.0 127.2
vp9_loop_filter_h_8_8_neon: 207.0 182.5
vp9_loop_filter_h_16_8_neon: 415.0 328.7
vp9_loop_filter_h_16_16_neon: 672.0 558.6
vp9_loop_filter_mix2_h_44_16_neon: 302.0 203.5
vp9_loop_filter_mix2_h_48_16_neon: 365.0 305.2
vp9_loop_filter_mix2_h_84_16_neon: 365.0 305.2
vp9_loop_filter_mix2_h_88_16_neon: 376.0 305.2
vp9_loop_filter_mix2_v_44_16_neon: 193.2 128.2
vp9_loop_filter_mix2_v_48_16_neon: 246.7 218.4
vp9_loop_filter_mix2_v_84_16_neon: 248.0 218.5
vp9_loop_filter_mix2_v_88_16_neon: 302.0 218.2
vp9_loop_filter_v_4_8_neon: 89.0 88.7
vp9_loop_filter_v_8_8_neon: 141.0 137.7
vp9_loop_filter_v_16_8_neon: 295.0 272.7
vp9_loop_filter_v_16_16_neon: 546.0 453.7
The speedup vs C code in checkasm tests is around 2-7x, which is
pretty much the same as for the 32 bit version. Even if these functions
are faster than their 32 bit equivalent, the C version that we compare
to also became around 1.3-1.7x faster than the C version in 32 bit.
Based on START_TIMER/STOP_TIMER wrapping around a few individual
functions, the speedup vs C code is around 4-5x.
Examples of runtimes vs C on a Cortex A57 (for a slightly older version
of the patch):
A57 gcc-5.3 neon
loop_filter_h_4_8_neon: 256.6 93.4
loop_filter_h_8_8_neon: 307.3 139.1
loop_filter_h_16_8_neon: 340.1 254.1
loop_filter_h_16_16_neon: 827.0 407.9
loop_filter_mix2_h_44_16_neon: 524.5 155.4
loop_filter_mix2_h_48_16_neon: 644.5 173.3
loop_filter_mix2_h_84_16_neon: 630.5 222.0
loop_filter_mix2_h_88_16_neon: 697.3 222.0
loop_filter_mix2_v_44_16_neon: 598.5 100.6
loop_filter_mix2_v_48_16_neon: 651.5 127.0
loop_filter_mix2_v_84_16_neon: 591.5 167.1
loop_filter_mix2_v_88_16_neon: 855.1 166.7
loop_filter_v_4_8_neon: 271.7 65.3
loop_filter_v_8_8_neon: 312.5 106.9
loop_filter_v_16_8_neon: 473.3 206.5
loop_filter_v_16_16_neon: 976.1 327.8
The speed-up compared to the C functions is 2.5 to 6 and the cortex-a57
is again 30-50% faster than the cortex-a53.
This is an adapted cherry-pick from libav commits
9d2afd1eb8 and
31756abe29.
Signed-off-by: Ronald S. Bultje <rsbultje@gmail.com>
This work is sponsored by, and copyright, Google.
These are ported from the ARM version; thanks to the larger
amount of registers available, we can do the 16x16 and 32x32
transforms in slices 8 pixels wide instead of 4. This gives
a speedup of around 1.4x compared to the 32 bit version.
The fact that aarch64 doesn't have the same d/q register
aliasing makes some of the macros quite a bit simpler as well.
Examples of runtimes vs the 32 bit version, on a Cortex A53:
ARM AArch64
vp9_inv_adst_adst_4x4_add_neon: 90.0 87.7
vp9_inv_adst_adst_8x8_add_neon: 400.0 354.7
vp9_inv_adst_adst_16x16_add_neon: 2526.5 1827.2
vp9_inv_dct_dct_4x4_add_neon: 74.0 72.7
vp9_inv_dct_dct_8x8_add_neon: 271.0 256.7
vp9_inv_dct_dct_16x16_add_neon: 1960.7 1372.7
vp9_inv_dct_dct_32x32_add_neon: 11988.9 8088.3
vp9_inv_wht_wht_4x4_add_neon: 63.0 57.7
The speedup vs C code (2-4x) is smaller than in the 32 bit case,
mostly because the C code ends up significantly faster (around
1.6x faster, with GCC 5.4) when built for aarch64.
Examples of runtimes vs C on a Cortex A57 (for a slightly older version
of the patch):
A57 gcc-5.3 neon
vp9_inv_adst_adst_4x4_add_neon: 152.2 60.0
vp9_inv_adst_adst_8x8_add_neon: 948.2 288.0
vp9_inv_adst_adst_16x16_add_neon: 4830.4 1380.5
vp9_inv_dct_dct_4x4_add_neon: 153.0 58.6
vp9_inv_dct_dct_8x8_add_neon: 789.2 180.2
vp9_inv_dct_dct_16x16_add_neon: 3639.6 917.1
vp9_inv_dct_dct_32x32_add_neon: 20462.1 4985.0
vp9_inv_wht_wht_4x4_add_neon: 91.0 49.8
The asm is around factor 3-4 faster than C on the cortex-a57 and the asm
is around 30-50% faster on the a57 compared to the a53.
This is an adapted cherry-pick from libav commit
3c9546dfaf.
Signed-off-by: Ronald S. Bultje <rsbultje@gmail.com>
This work is sponsored by, and copyright, Google.
These are ported from the ARM version; it is essentially a 1:1
port with no extra added features, but with some hand tuning
(especially for the plain copy/avg functions). The ARM version
isn't very register starved to begin with, so there's not much
to be gained from having more spare registers here - we only
avoid having to clobber callee-saved registers.
Examples of runtimes vs the 32 bit version, on a Cortex A53:
ARM AArch64
vp9_avg4_neon: 27.2 23.7
vp9_avg8_neon: 56.5 54.7
vp9_avg16_neon: 169.9 167.4
vp9_avg32_neon: 585.8 585.2
vp9_avg64_neon: 2460.3 2294.7
vp9_avg_8tap_smooth_4h_neon: 132.7 125.2
vp9_avg_8tap_smooth_4hv_neon: 478.8 442.0
vp9_avg_8tap_smooth_4v_neon: 126.0 93.7
vp9_avg_8tap_smooth_8h_neon: 241.7 234.2
vp9_avg_8tap_smooth_8hv_neon: 690.9 646.5
vp9_avg_8tap_smooth_8v_neon: 245.0 205.5
vp9_avg_8tap_smooth_64h_neon: 11273.2 11280.1
vp9_avg_8tap_smooth_64hv_neon: 22980.6 22184.1
vp9_avg_8tap_smooth_64v_neon: 11549.7 10781.1
vp9_put4_neon: 18.0 17.2
vp9_put8_neon: 40.2 37.7
vp9_put16_neon: 97.4 99.5
vp9_put32_neon/armv8: 346.0 307.4
vp9_put64_neon/armv8: 1319.0 1107.5
vp9_put_8tap_smooth_4h_neon: 126.7 118.2
vp9_put_8tap_smooth_4hv_neon: 465.7 434.0
vp9_put_8tap_smooth_4v_neon: 113.0 86.5
vp9_put_8tap_smooth_8h_neon: 229.7 221.6
vp9_put_8tap_smooth_8hv_neon: 658.9 621.3
vp9_put_8tap_smooth_8v_neon: 215.0 187.5
vp9_put_8tap_smooth_64h_neon: 10636.7 10627.8
vp9_put_8tap_smooth_64hv_neon: 21076.8 21026.9
vp9_put_8tap_smooth_64v_neon: 9635.0 9632.4
These are generally about as fast as the corresponding ARM
routines on the same CPU (at least on the A53), in most cases
marginally faster.
The speedup vs C code is pretty much the same as for the 32 bit
case; on the A53 it's around 6-13x for ther larger 8tap filters.
The exact speedup varies a little, since the C versions generally
don't end up exactly as slow/fast as on 32 bit.
This is an adapted cherry-pick from libav commit
383d96aa22.
Signed-off-by: Ronald S. Bultje <rsbultje@gmail.com>
Restore alphabetical order in lists, break overly long lines, do some
prettyprinting, add some explanatory section comments, group parts
together that belong together logically.
Previously, ff_h264_idct_add_neon (originally in the arm version) used
a non-regular transpose in order to be able to use more instructions
that deal with registers as 128 bit register pairs. The aarch64
translation doesn't do it to the same extent, but brought along the
same structure since it was a straight translation.
This reshuffles ff_h264_idct_add_neon, bringing it closer to
the C implementation, making the transpose_4x4H macro do a regular
transpose, usable for other algorithms as well.
Previously, the third and fourth output from transpose_4x4H were
swapped, and prior to cc29d96d5a, the same inputs as well. In
addition to just swapping the outputs, also renumber the intermediate
registers for better readability (making the register order match
transpose_4x8B).
This runs with the same number of cycles as before.
Signed-off-by: Martin Storsjö <martin@martin.st>
Fix related register order issue in ff_h264_idct_add_neon.
Found-by: zjh8890 <243186085@qq.com>
Signed-off-by: Michael Niedermayer <michael@niedermayer.cc>
~25% faster dts decoding overall. The checkasm CPU cycles numbers are
not that useful since synth_filter_float() calls FFTContext.imdct_half().
cortex-a57 cortex-a53
synth_filter_float_c: 1866.2 3490.9
synth_filter_float_neon: 915.0 1531.5
With fftc.imdct_half forced to imdct_half_neon:
cortex-a57 cortex-a53
synth_filter_float_c: 1718.4 3025.3
synth_filter_float_neon: 926.2 1530.1
The transpose_4x4H is wrong which cost me much time to find this bug. The orders of r2 and r3 are wrong,
this bug waste me much time while I make aarch64 arm instruction which used the function.
This allows running the code on android, where 64 bit binaries with
text relocations aren't allowed to be loaded.
Signed-off-by: Martin Storsjö <martin@martin.st>
llvm's integrated assembler does not accept spaces as macro argument
delimiter when targeting darwin. Using a explicit delimiter is a good
idea in principle since it makes case like 'macro 4 -2' vs 'macro 4 - 2'
clear.
Martin Storsjö
Janne Grunau
Rostislav Pehlivanov
James Almer
Xiaolei Yu
Clément Bœsch
Vittorio Giovara
Diego Biurrun
foo86
Alexandra Hájková
Michael Niedermayer
zjh8890
Carl Eugen Hoyos
Michael Niedermayer