[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] dsputil: add bswap16_buf()

[Michael Niedermayer]

On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 06:34:04PM +0100, M?ns Rullg?rd wrote:
> Michael Niedermayer <michaelni at gmx.at> writes:
> 
> > On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 11:43:44AM +0100, M?ns Rullg?rd wrote:
> >> Michael Niedermayer <michaelni at gmx.at> writes:
> >> 
> >> > On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 11:24:11AM +0100, M?ns Rullg?rd wrote:
> >> >> Mans Rullgard <mans at mansr.com> writes:
> >> >> 
> >> >> > ---
> >> >> >  libavcodec/dsputil.c |    7 +++++++
> >> >> >  libavcodec/dsputil.h |    1 +
> >> >> >  2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> >> >> 
> >> >> Is anyone fundamentally opposed to this?  If not, can we please just
> >> >> apply it and figure out the required alignment later?
> >> >
> >> > without the alignment being documented its not possible to implement it
> >> > efficiently, thus useless
> >> 
> >> No more useless than having a dozen copies of that loop scattered
> >> about the code.
> >
> > Sorry but you cant block badly needed changes without any constructive
> > comment on what is wrong with them so they could be fixed.
> 
> You're the one doing the blocking here.

you have done great work on arm optimizations and also the build system
but theres a limit to the amount of trolling attacks and fillibustering
that ill swallow

its you blocking the code and everyone can just read
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavfi test for 1-1 filters pixel format output
to see that himself

ill quote your discussion with stefano:-----------------------------
On date Monday 2010-06-14 12:28:51 +0100, M?ns Rullg?rd encoded:
> Stefano Sabatini <stefano.sabatini-lala at poste.it> writes:
>
> > On date Sunday 2010-06-06 01:30:16 +0200, Stefano Sabatini encoded:
> >> On date Wednesday 2010-06-02 23:42:32 +0200, Stefano Sabatini encoded:
> >> > On date Monday 2010-05-24 22:12:25 +0100, M?ns Rullg?rd encoded:
> >> > > Stefano Sabatini <stefano.sabatini-lala at poste.it> writes:
> >> > [...]
> >> > > >> Did I review this?  Of course not, or I would have told you it breaks
> >> > > >> cross-builds (only if the test is run of course).
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Michael asked to commit, I did since the test is disabled so people
> >> > > > can start to work out the lavfi bugs.
> >> > >
> >> > > He also asked me to review it.
> >> > >
> >> > > > Feel free to fix it yourself or point out the problem it has.
> >> > >
> >> > > I'll get to it eventually, but the problem is that the executable you
> >> > > build has to be run with $TARGET_EXEC and $TARGET_PATH.
> >> > 
> >> > Uhm, if that is true why tiny_psnr in regression-funcs.sh is not
> >> > defined like that.
> >> > 
> >> > Anyway my main problem seems that the lavfi-showfiltfmts I'm using
> >> > needs to include and link against the libav* libraries, in this being
> >> > different from the other testprogs, so it is failing to compile and I
> >> > don't even know if this crossbuilding thing is even able to support
> >> > that requirement.
> >> > 
> >> > Your help is welcome, regards.
> >> 
> >> M?ns-ping.
> >
> > I'll apply this patch or a variant in three days if I get no reply.
>
> You will do no such thing.  The patch is WRONG.

I know that, and my treat was meant to solicit your intervention in
this thread. I'm still missing the constructive part though.
---------------------------

The regression tests are essential for moving forward with libavfilter



> 
> > And then on the other hand expect me to accept half digested new API
> > that due to lacking of 1 line of text cannot be implemented.
> >
> > please send code that is remotely close to the quality you expect from
> > people working on your scripts.
> 
> The patch has exactly the same quality as the various loops it intends
> to replace.  I'm tired of you imposing impossible perfection
> requirements on changes that may not be perfect, but still a huge step
> in the right direction.  Why don't you (or others) help find all the
> places doing 16-bit block byteswaps instead?

why dont you just add a 16byte alignmnet requirement to all arguments?
we will then find out once someone tries to use it at a point where
this cannot be met. And we wont block implementations in the meantime

[...]

-- 
Michael     GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB

The real ebay dictionary, page 2
"100% positive feedback" - "All either got their money back or didnt complain"
"Best seller ever, very honest" - "Seller refunded buyer after failed scam"
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.mplayerhq.hu/pipermail/ffmpeg-devel/attachments/20100617/1c11d857/attachment.pgp>