Sandybridge: 47 cycles
Having a loop counter is a 7 cycle gain.
Unrolling is another 7 cycle gain.
Working in reverse scan is another 6 cycles.
Signed-off-by: Diego Biurrun <diego@biurrun.de>
233 to 105 cycles on Arrandale and Win64.
Replacing the multiplication by s_m[m] by a pand and a pxor with
appropriate vectors is slower. Unrolling is a 15 cycles win.
A SSE version was 4 cycles slower.
Signed-off-by: Michael Niedermayer <michaelni@gmx.at>
From 312 to 89/68 (sse/sse2) cycles on Arrandale and Win64.
Sandybridge: 68/47 cycles.
Having a loop counter is a 7 cycle gain.
Unrolling is another 7 cycle gain.
Working in reverse scan is another 6 cycles.
Signed-off-by: Michael Niedermayer <michaelni@gmx.at>
Timing on Arrandale:
C SSE
Win32: 57 44
Win64: 47 38
Unrolling and not storing mask both save some cycles.
Signed-off-by: Diego Biurrun <diego@biurrun.de>
Timing on Arrandale:
C SSE
Win32: 57 44
Win64: 47 38
Unrolling and not storing mask both save some cycles.
Signed-off-by: Michael Niedermayer <michaelni@gmx.at>
Start and end index are multiple of 2, therefore guaranteeing aligned access.
Also, this allows to generate 4 floats per loop, keeping the alignment all
along.
Timing:
- 32 bits: 326c -> 172c
- 64 bits: 323c -> 156c
Signed-off-by: Diego Biurrun <diego@biurrun.de>
Prevents a signflip in the counter, and a subsequent crash because of
overreads/overwrites.
Found-by: Mateusz "j00ru" Jurczyk and Gynvael Coldwind
CC: libav-stable@libav.org
This is even potentially faster in this use-case.
Should fix AAC SBR decoding on machines with SSE but not
SSE2, fixing track issue #1041.
Signed-off-by: Reimar Döffinger <Reimar.Doeffinger@gmx.de>
Since the values are floats, using the float operations
makes sense, improves performance on some CPUs and
makes the code SSE compatible instead of needing SSE2.
Based on suggestion by Jason.
Signed-off-by: Reimar Döffinger <Reimar.Doeffinger@gmx.de>
Signed-off-by: Ronald S. Bultje <rsbultje@gmail.com>
movq from SSE register _to_ memory is an SSE2 instruction.
Use the SSE movlps function instead that does the same thing.
Signed-off-by: Reimar Döffinger <Reimar.Doeffinger@gmx.de>
Signed-off-by: Ronald S. Bultje <rsbultje@gmail.com>
Unrolling the main loop to process, instead of 4 elements:
- 8: minor gain of 2 cycles (not worth the extra object size)
- 2: loss of 8 cycles.
Assigning STEP to a register is a loss. Output address (Y) is almost always
unaligned.
Timings:
- C (32/64 bits): 117/109 cycles
- SSE: 57 cycles
Signed-off-by: Ronald S. Bultje <rsbultje@gmail.com>
The 32bits targets have been compiled with -mfpmath=sse for proper reference.
sbr_sum_square C /32bits: 82c (unrolled)/102c
C /64bits: 69c (unrolled)/82c
SSE/32bits: 42c
SSE/64bits: 31c
Use of SSE4.1 dpps to perform the final sum is slower.
Not unrolling to perform 8 operations in a loop yields 10 more cycles.
Signed-off-by: Ronald S. Bultje <rsbultje@gmail.com>
Christophe Gisquet
Diego Biurrun
Thilo Borgmann
Michael Niedermayer
Ronald S. Bultje
Reimar Döffinger