[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] SSE RDFT

Jason Garrett-Glaser darkshikari
Sun Mar 21 00:48:55 CET 2010

On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 5:09 AM, Michael Niedermayer <michaelni at gmx.at> wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 10:38:11AM +0100, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 12:31:12AM +0000, M?ns Rullg?rd wrote:
>> > Michael Niedermayer <michaelni at gmx.at> writes:
> [...]
>> >
>> > > yasm vs. inline is for the most part bikeshed, but there are cases where one
>> > > wants to keep parts of the code in C for maintainability or integrate the
>> > > code into C code avoiding call overhead. For these cases inline is required
>> > > And we dont always know ahead of time where call overhead will matter.
>> >
>> > We were talking about code called through a function pointer here.
>> yes, so it falls in the category that can be done in inline or yasm
>> technically, that is the choice is a matter of preference/bikeshed
> btw, speaking of yasm, a not too long while ago i realized that configure
> simply compiles without yasm optimizations if yasm isnt installed
> i noticed it just because x264 doesnt and warns, we should do the same
> this issue alone weighs heavier than any difference between inline and
> yasm. Because loosing the optimizations without the user knowing is really
> bad.

I agree; x264 used to do the same, and we changed it exactly for the
reason you stated.  I would strongly support a similar change in

Dark Shikari

More information about the ffmpeg-devel mailing list