On Fri, 29 Dec 2023, James Almer wrote:
On 12/29/2023 9:16 AM, Martin Storsjö wrote:
On Fri, 29 Dec 2023, flow gg wrote:
Tests on x86 might fail, possibly due to a 16-bit sub overflow
If this only happens in checkasm but not in real life use, it means
that
the checkasm test input is out of range, and we should try to mimic the
real input data.
If the issue is off-by-one due to rounding, we could allow it by making
a comparison per element, and tolerate a certain diff (maybe only on
x86).
But if it is an actual overflow on valid input data, the x86 asm
definitely needs to be fixed, by someone... Worst case, we might want
to
disable that checkasm test on x86 temporarily.
The function subtracts an int16 from an int8, whose result may not fit
on an int16. The x86 asm expects it to do, hence the failures.
I don't know if such cases exist in real world files, so like you said,
if they don't then the test should generate in-range input. But if they
do, i'll fix the x86 asm (sadly, this means sse4 will be required
instead of sse2).
I think it's probably best to limit the checkasm inputs that don't
overflow, for now.
// Martin
_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-devel mailing list
ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email
ffmpeg-devel-requ...@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".
