[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH v2 4/4] swscale/aarch64: Add rgb24 to yuv implementation

[Martin Storsjö]

On Fri, 7 Jun 2024, Zhao Zhili wrote:

>> On Jun 7, 2024, at 17:09, Martin Storsjö <martin at martin.st> wrote:
>> 
>> On Fri, 7 Jun 2024, Zhao Zhili wrote:
>> 
>>> Note both tests use clang as compiler, which has vectorization
>>> enabled by default with -O3.
>> 
>> FWIW, for more interesting benchmarks, you can configure the build with --optflags="-O3 -fno-vectorize".
>> 
>> (Although, the benchmarks against a compiler vectorized version still is relevant for knowing how much real-world benefit you get from the optimizations.)
>> 
>>> +#include "libavutil/aarch64/asm.S"
>>> +
>>> +.macro rgb24_to_yuv_load_rgb, src
>>> +        ld3             { v16.16b, v17.16b, v18.16b }, [\src]
>>> +        uxtl            v19.8h, v16.8b             // v19: r
>>> +        uxtl            v20.8h, v17.8b             // v20: g
>>> +        uxtl            v21.8h, v18.8b             // v21: b
>>> +        uxtl2           v22.8h, v16.16b            // v22: r
>>> +        uxtl2           v23.8h, v17.16b            // v23: g
>>> +        uxtl2           v24.8h, v18.16b            // v24: b
>>> +.endm
>>> +
>>> +.macro rgb24_to_yuv_product, r, g, b, dst1, dst2, dst, coef0, coef1, coef2, right_shift
>>> +        mov             \dst1\().16b, v6.16b                    // dst1 = const_offset
>>> +        mov             \dst2\().16b, v6.16b                    // dst2 = const_offset
>>> +        smlal           \dst1\().4s, \coef0\().4h, \r\().4h     // dst1 += rx * r
>>> +        smlal           \dst1\().4s, \coef1\().4h, \g\().4h     // dst1 += gx * g
>>> +        smlal           \dst1\().4s, \coef2\().4h, \b\().4h     // dst1 += bx * b
>>> +        smlal2          \dst2\().4s, \coef0\().8h, \r\().8h     // dst2 += rx * r
>>> +        smlal2          \dst2\().4s, \coef1\().8h, \g\().8h     // dst2 += gx * g
>>> +        smlal2          \dst2\().4s, \coef2\().8h, \b\().8h     // dst2 += bx * b
>>> +        sqshrn          \dst\().4h, \dst1\().4s, \right_shift   // dst_lower_half = dst1 >> right_shift
>>> +        sqshrn2         \dst\().8h, \dst2\().4s, \right_shift   // dst_higher_half = dst2 >> right_shift
>>> +.endm
>>> +
>>> +function ff_rgb24ToY_neon, export=1
>>> +        cmp             w4, #0                  // check width > 0
>>> +        ldp             w10, w11, [x5]          // w10: ry, w11: gy
>>> +        ldr             w12, [x5, #8]           // w12: by
>>> +        b.le            3f
>>> +
>>> +        mov             w9, #256                // w9 = 1 << (RGB2YUV_SHIFT - 7)
>>> +        movk            w9, #8, lsl #16         // w9 += 32 << (RGB2YUV_SHIFT - 1)
>>> +        dup             v6.4s, w9               // w9: const_offset
>>> +
>>> +        cmp             w4, #16
>>> +        dup             v0.8h, w10
>>> +        dup             v1.8h, w11
>>> +        dup             v2.8h, w12
>>> +        b.lt            2f
>>> +1:
>>> +        rgb24_to_yuv_load_rgb x1
>>> +        rgb24_to_yuv_product v19, v20, v21, v25, v26, v16, v0, v1, v2, #9
>>> +        rgb24_to_yuv_product v22, v23, v24, v27, v28, v17, v0, v1, v2, #9
>>> +        sub             w4, w4, #16             // width -= 16
>>> +        add             x1, x1, #48             // src += 48
>>> +        cmp             w4, #16                 // width >= 16 ?
>>> +        stp             q16, q17, [x0], #32     // store to dst
>>> +        b.ge            1b
>>> +        cbz             x4, 3f
>>> +2:
>>> +        ldrb            w13, [x1]               // w13: r
>>> +        ldrb            w14, [x1, #1]           // w14: g
>>> +        ldrb            w15, [x1, #2]           // w15: b
>>> +
>>> +        smaddl          x13, w13, w10, x9       // x13 = ry * r + const_offset
>>> +        smaddl          x13, w14, w11, x13      // x13 += gy * g
>>> +        smaddl          x13, w15, w12, x13      // x13 += by * b
>>> +        asr             w13, w13, #9            // x13 >>= 9
>>> +        sub             w4, w4, #1              // i++
>> 
>> The comment needs to be updated to i--, or maybe rather width--
>> 
>> Also, when approaching zero, I would intuitively do subs, followed by b.gt (or b.ne), instead of sub + cbnz. But it's the same number of registers, so I'm not sure if it makes any practical difference. Intuitively it feels more efficient (as the condition gets calculated earlier) though.
>
> I have checked Cortext A78:
> 1. cbnz and b.gt has the same execute latency and execution throughput
> 2. sub has execution throughput 4, while subs has throughput 3.
>
> So I think sub + cbnz is more efficient than subs + b.gt.
>
> On Cortext A57, there is no difference between the choice.

Ok, fair enough, this sounds reasonable - I don't mind doing sub+cbnz. (I 
didn't doublecheck the document.)

// Martin