[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] Convert MMX deinterlacing code to YASM

[Vitor Sessak]

On 07/29/2010 06:11 PM, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 12:53:07PM +0200, Vitor Sessak wrote:
>> On 07/29/2010 11:50 AM, Vitor Sessak wrote:
>>> On 07/29/2010 01:00 AM, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
>>>> On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 12:33:17AM +0200, Vitor Sessak wrote:
>>>>> On 07/28/2010 11:56 PM, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
>>>>>> On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 05:54:18PM +0200, Vitor Sessak wrote:
>>>>>>> $subj, fixes the warning
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> In file included from
>>>>>>>> /misc/fate/build/x86_32-linux-gcc-4.3/src/libavcodec/imgconvert.c:41:
>>>>>>>> /misc/fate/build/x86_32-linux-gcc-4.3/src/libavcodec/x86/mmx.h:24:2:
>>>>>>>> warning: #warning Everything in this header is deprecated, use plain
>>>>>>>> __asm__()! New code using this header will be rejected.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -Vitor
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> imgconvert.c | 99
>>>>>>> +++++++---------------------------------------------
>>>>>>> x86/deinterlace.asm | 81 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>>>> x86/dsputil_mmx.h | 13 ++++++
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That deinterlacer is deprecated, we have better code in libpostproc
>>>>>> libmpcodecs and probably other places
>>>>>
>>>>> Anything LGPL and MMX optimized?
>>>>
>>>> The idea is to get some commercial company to donate money to the authors
>>>> and our non profit to relicence to LGPL
>>>
>>> Since we know this can take some time (remember swscale), I think my
>>> patch is useful to have cleaner code in the meantime.
>>>
>>>>> BTW, talking about x86/mmx.h, is x86/idct_mmx.c deprecated also or is it
>>>>> worth converting it to plain asm?
>>>>
>>>> i dont know, but it doesnt seem very high priority to me
>>>
>>> It is not, but it is something that is really fast to do (a good part of
>>> the work is done by the C pre-processor). Low cost (and low gain) work.
>>
>> Saying is easy is not enough. Here is the patch.
>>
>> -Vitor
>
>>   idct_mmx.c |  449 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------------------------
>>   1 file changed, 237 insertions(+), 212 deletions(-)
>> 17b6821eea804d3013d40a94dc1406f7fbc2bc6f  deintrisefy_idct_mmx.diff
>
> if tested (same md5 on output) then it shoudl be ok

I tested both the mmx and mmxext version and applied.

-Vitor