On Sat, Feb 08, 2014 at 02:38:53PM +0000, Janne Grunau wrote:
> On 2014-02-06 12:05:16 +0100, Diego Biurrun wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 06, 2014 at 08:28:44AM +0100, Anton Khirnov wrote:
> > > On Wed, 5 Feb 2014 15:32:59 +0100, Diego Biurrun <di...@biurrun.de> wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Feb 05, 2014 at 09:59:45AM +0100, Anton Khirnov wrote:
> > > > > --- a/libavcodec/ppc/vp8dsp_altivec.c
> > > > > +++ b/libavcodec/ppc/vp8dsp_altivec.c
> > > > > @@ -269,9 +269,44 @@ EPEL_HV(4, 4,6)
> > > > >
> > > > > +static void put_vp8_pixels16_altivec(uint8_t *dst, ptrdiff_t
> > > > > dstride, uint8_t *src, ptrdiff_t sstride, int h, int mx, int my)
> > > > > {
> > > > > }
> > > >
> > > > This duplicates the ff_put_pixels16_altivec() function from
> > > > libavcodec/ppc/hpeldsp_altivec.c.
> > >
> > > Yes I know.
> > > Got a better solution?
> >
> > What about replacing the version in hpeldsp_altivec.c with this more
> > flexible version?
>
> Can we please commit this? Complaining over the duplicated ppc/altivec
> version is a little unfair if we already have the same duplication for
> C, x86 and arm.
Whatever, code duplication seems to be the rage these days ...
Diego
_______________________________________________
libav-devel mailing list
libav-devel@libav.org
https://lists.libav.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-devel
