Chiebot-Mirror/FFmpeg - FFmpeg - Gitea: Git with a cup of tea

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
Martin Storsjö	21c89f3a26	arm/aarch64: vp9: Fix vertical alignment Align the second/third operands as they usually are. Due to the wildly varying sizes of the written out operands in aarch64 assembly, the column alignment is usually not as clear as in arm assembly. This is cherrypicked from libav commit `7995ebfad1`. Signed-off-by: Martin Storsjö <martin@martin.st>	8 years ago
Martin Storsjö	a88db8b9a0	arm: vp9lpf: Implement the mix2_44 function with one single filter pass For this case, with 8 inputs but only changing 4 of them, we can fit all 16 input pixels into a q register, and still have enough temporary registers for doing the loop filter. The wd=8 filters would require too many temporary registers for processing all 16 pixels at once though. Before: Cortex A7 A8 A9 A53 vp9_loop_filter_mix2_v_44_16_neon: 289.7 256.2 237.5 181.2 After: vp9_loop_filter_mix2_v_44_16_neon: 221.2 150.5 177.7 138.0 This is cherrypicked from libav commit `575e31e931`. Signed-off-by: Martin Storsjö <martin@martin.st>	8 years ago
Martin Storsjö	3fbbad2984	arm/aarch64: vp9lpf: Keep the comparison to E within 8 bit The theoretical maximum value of E is 193, so we can just saturate the addition to 255. Before: Cortex A7 A8 A9 A53 A53/AArch64 vp9_loop_filter_v_4_8_neon: 143.0 127.7 114.8 88.0 87.7 vp9_loop_filter_v_8_8_neon: 241.0 197.2 173.7 140.0 136.7 vp9_loop_filter_v_16_8_neon: 497.0 419.5 379.7 293.0 275.7 vp9_loop_filter_v_16_16_neon: 965.2 818.7 731.4 579.0 452.0 After: vp9_loop_filter_v_4_8_neon: 136.0 125.7 112.6 84.0 83.0 vp9_loop_filter_v_8_8_neon: 234.0 195.5 171.5 136.0 133.7 vp9_loop_filter_v_16_8_neon: 490.0 417.5 377.7 289.0 271.0 vp9_loop_filter_v_16_16_neon: 951.2 814.7 732.3 571.0 446.7 This is cherrypicked from libav commit `c582cb8537`. Signed-off-by: Martin Storsjö <martin@martin.st>	8 years ago
Martin Storsjö	83399cf569	arm: vp9lpf: Interleave the start of flat8in into the calculation above This adds lots of extra .ifs, but speeds it up by a couple cycles, by avoiding stalls. This is cherrypicked from libav commit `e18c39005a`. Signed-off-by: Martin Storsjö <martin@martin.st>	8 years ago
Martin Storsjö	92ab8374b1	arm: vp9lpf: Use orrs instead of orr+cmp This is cherrypicked from libav commit `435cd7bc99`. Signed-off-by: Martin Storsjö <martin@martin.st>	8 years ago
Martin Storsjö	f0ecbb13cf	arm/aarch64: vp9lpf: Calculate !hev directly Previously we first calculated hev, and then negated it. Since we were able to schedule the negation in the middle of another calculation, we don't see any gain in all cases. Before: Cortex A7 A8 A9 A53 A53/AArch64 vp9_loop_filter_v_4_8_neon: 147.0 129.0 115.8 89.0 88.7 vp9_loop_filter_v_8_8_neon: 242.0 198.5 174.7 140.0 136.7 vp9_loop_filter_v_16_8_neon: 500.0 419.5 382.7 293.0 275.7 vp9_loop_filter_v_16_16_neon: 971.2 825.5 731.5 579.0 453.0 After: vp9_loop_filter_v_4_8_neon: 143.0 127.7 114.8 88.0 87.7 vp9_loop_filter_v_8_8_neon: 241.0 197.2 173.7 140.0 136.7 vp9_loop_filter_v_16_8_neon: 497.0 419.5 379.7 293.0 275.7 vp9_loop_filter_v_16_16_neon: 965.2 818.7 731.4 579.0 452.0 This is cherrypicked from libav commit `e1f9de86f4`. Signed-off-by: Martin Storsjö <martin@martin.st>	8 years ago
Martin Storsjö	6bec60a683	arm: vp9: Add NEON loop filters This work is sponsored by, and copyright, Google. The implementation tries to have smart handling of cases where no pixels need the full filtering for the 8/16 width filters, skipping both calculation and writeback of the unmodified pixels in those cases. The actual effect of this is hard to test with checkasm though, since it tests the full filtering, and the benefit depends on how many filtered blocks use the shortcut. Examples of relative speedup compared to the C version, from checkasm: Cortex A7 A8 A9 A53 vp9_loop_filter_h_4_8_neon: 2.72 2.68 1.78 3.15 vp9_loop_filter_h_8_8_neon: 2.36 2.38 1.70 2.91 vp9_loop_filter_h_16_8_neon: 1.80 1.89 1.45 2.01 vp9_loop_filter_h_16_16_neon: 2.81 2.78 2.18 3.16 vp9_loop_filter_mix2_h_44_16_neon: 2.65 2.67 1.93 3.05 vp9_loop_filter_mix2_h_48_16_neon: 2.46 2.38 1.81 2.85 vp9_loop_filter_mix2_h_84_16_neon: 2.50 2.41 1.73 2.85 vp9_loop_filter_mix2_h_88_16_neon: 2.77 2.66 1.96 3.23 vp9_loop_filter_mix2_v_44_16_neon: 4.28 4.46 3.22 5.70 vp9_loop_filter_mix2_v_48_16_neon: 3.92 4.00 3.03 5.19 vp9_loop_filter_mix2_v_84_16_neon: 3.97 4.31 2.98 5.33 vp9_loop_filter_mix2_v_88_16_neon: 3.91 4.19 3.06 5.18 vp9_loop_filter_v_4_8_neon: 4.53 4.47 3.31 6.05 vp9_loop_filter_v_8_8_neon: 3.58 3.99 2.92 5.17 vp9_loop_filter_v_16_8_neon: 3.40 3.50 2.81 4.68 vp9_loop_filter_v_16_16_neon: 4.66 4.41 3.74 6.02 The speedup vs C code is around 2-6x. The numbers are quite inconclusive though, since the checkasm test runs multiple filterings on top of each other, so later rounds might end up with different codepaths (different decisions on which filter to apply, based on input pixel differences). Disabling the early-exit in the asm doesn't give a fair comparison either though, since the C code only does the necessary calcuations for each row. Based on START_TIMER/STOP_TIMER wrapping around a few individual functions, the speedup vs C code is around 4-9x. This is pretty similar in runtime to the corresponding routines in libvpx. (This is comparing vpx_lpf_vertical_16_neon, vpx_lpf_horizontal_edge_8_neon and vpx_lpf_horizontal_edge_16_neon to vp9_loop_filter_h_16_8_neon, vp9_loop_filter_v_16_8_neon and vp9_loop_filter_v_16_16_neon - note that the naming of horizonal and vertical is flipped between the libraries.) In order to have stable, comparable numbers, the early exits in both asm versions were disabled, forcing the full filtering codepath. Cortex A7 A8 A9 A53 vp9_loop_filter_h_16_8_neon: 597.2 472.0 482.4 415.0 libvpx vpx_lpf_vertical_16_neon: 626.0 464.5 470.7 445.0 vp9_loop_filter_v_16_8_neon: 500.2 422.5 429.7 295.0 libvpx vpx_lpf_horizontal_edge_8_neon: 586.5 414.5 415.6 383.2 vp9_loop_filter_v_16_16_neon: 905.0 784.7 791.5 546.0 libvpx vpx_lpf_horizontal_edge_16_neon: 1060.2 751.7 743.5 685.2 Our version is consistently faster on on A7 and A53, marginally slower on A8, and sometimes faster, sometimes slower on A9 (marginally slower in all three tests in this particular test run). This is an adapted cherry-pick from libav commit `dd299a2d6d`. Signed-off-by: Ronald S. Bultje <rsbultje@gmail.com>	8 years ago
Martin Storsjö	dd299a2d6d	arm: vp9: Add NEON loop filters This work is sponsored by, and copyright, Google. The implementation tries to have smart handling of cases where no pixels need the full filtering for the 8/16 width filters, skipping both calculation and writeback of the unmodified pixels in those cases. The actual effect of this is hard to test with checkasm though, since it tests the full filtering, and the benefit depends on how many filtered blocks use the shortcut. Examples of relative speedup compared to the C version, from checkasm: Cortex A7 A8 A9 A53 vp9_loop_filter_h_4_8_neon: 2.72 2.68 1.78 3.15 vp9_loop_filter_h_8_8_neon: 2.36 2.38 1.70 2.91 vp9_loop_filter_h_16_8_neon: 1.80 1.89 1.45 2.01 vp9_loop_filter_h_16_16_neon: 2.81 2.78 2.18 3.16 vp9_loop_filter_mix2_h_44_16_neon: 2.65 2.67 1.93 3.05 vp9_loop_filter_mix2_h_48_16_neon: 2.46 2.38 1.81 2.85 vp9_loop_filter_mix2_h_84_16_neon: 2.50 2.41 1.73 2.85 vp9_loop_filter_mix2_h_88_16_neon: 2.77 2.66 1.96 3.23 vp9_loop_filter_mix2_v_44_16_neon: 4.28 4.46 3.22 5.70 vp9_loop_filter_mix2_v_48_16_neon: 3.92 4.00 3.03 5.19 vp9_loop_filter_mix2_v_84_16_neon: 3.97 4.31 2.98 5.33 vp9_loop_filter_mix2_v_88_16_neon: 3.91 4.19 3.06 5.18 vp9_loop_filter_v_4_8_neon: 4.53 4.47 3.31 6.05 vp9_loop_filter_v_8_8_neon: 3.58 3.99 2.92 5.17 vp9_loop_filter_v_16_8_neon: 3.40 3.50 2.81 4.68 vp9_loop_filter_v_16_16_neon: 4.66 4.41 3.74 6.02 The speedup vs C code is around 2-6x. The numbers are quite inconclusive though, since the checkasm test runs multiple filterings on top of each other, so later rounds might end up with different codepaths (different decisions on which filter to apply, based on input pixel differences). Disabling the early-exit in the asm doesn't give a fair comparison either though, since the C code only does the necessary calcuations for each row. Based on START_TIMER/STOP_TIMER wrapping around a few individual functions, the speedup vs C code is around 4-9x. This is pretty similar in runtime to the corresponding routines in libvpx. (This is comparing vpx_lpf_vertical_16_neon, vpx_lpf_horizontal_edge_8_neon and vpx_lpf_horizontal_edge_16_neon to vp9_loop_filter_h_16_8_neon, vp9_loop_filter_v_16_8_neon and vp9_loop_filter_v_16_16_neon - note that the naming of horizonal and vertical is flipped between the libraries.) In order to have stable, comparable numbers, the early exits in both asm versions were disabled, forcing the full filtering codepath. Cortex A7 A8 A9 A53 vp9_loop_filter_h_16_8_neon: 597.2 472.0 482.4 415.0 libvpx vpx_lpf_vertical_16_neon: 626.0 464.5 470.7 445.0 vp9_loop_filter_v_16_8_neon: 500.2 422.5 429.7 295.0 libvpx vpx_lpf_horizontal_edge_8_neon: 586.5 414.5 415.6 383.2 vp9_loop_filter_v_16_16_neon: 905.0 784.7 791.5 546.0 libvpx vpx_lpf_horizontal_edge_16_neon: 1060.2 751.7 743.5 685.2 Our version is consistently faster on on A7 and A53, marginally slower on A8, and sometimes faster, sometimes slower on A9 (marginally slower in all three tests in this particular test run). Signed-off-by: Martin Storsjö <martin@martin.st>	8 years ago