[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5acab57bd6c1088dd1beff1df0ba71d1@codeaurora.org>
Date: Mon, 04 Oct 2021 13:07:22 +0530
From: dikshita@...eaurora.org
To: Stanimir Varbanov <stanimir.varbanov@...aro.org>
Cc: linux-media@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, vgarodia@...eaurora.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 6/7] media: venus: helpers: update NUM_MBS macro
calculation
Hi Stan,
On 2021-10-02 03:01, Stanimir Varbanov wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 8/10/21 12:47 PM, Dikshita Agarwal wrote:
>> Consider alignment while calculating NUM_MBS.
>>
>> Co-developed-by: Mansur Alisha Shaik <mansur@...eaurora.org>
>> Signed-off-by: Dikshita Agarwal <dikshita@...eaurora.org>
>> ---
>> drivers/media/platform/qcom/venus/helpers.c | 13 +++++++------
>> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/media/platform/qcom/venus/helpers.c
>> b/drivers/media/platform/qcom/venus/helpers.c
>> index 60a2775..2db33ba 100644
>> --- a/drivers/media/platform/qcom/venus/helpers.c
>> +++ b/drivers/media/platform/qcom/venus/helpers.c
>> @@ -18,8 +18,8 @@
>> #include "hfi_platform.h"
>> #include "hfi_parser.h"
>>
>> -#define NUM_MBS_720P (((1280 + 15) >> 4) * ((720 + 15) >> 4))
>> -#define NUM_MBS_4K (((4096 + 15) >> 4) * ((2304 + 15) >> 4))
>> +#define NUM_MBS_720P (((ALIGN(1280, 16)) >> 4) * ((ALIGN(736, 16)) >>
>> 4))
>> +#define NUM_MBS_4K (((ALIGN(4096, 16)) >> 4) * ((ALIGN(2304, 16)) >>
>> 4))
>>
>> struct intbuf {
>> struct list_head list;
>> @@ -1098,16 +1098,17 @@ static u32 venus_helper_get_work_mode(struct
>> venus_inst *inst)
>> u32 num_mbs;
>>
>> mode = VIDC_WORK_MODE_2;
>> +
>> if (inst->session_type == VIDC_SESSION_TYPE_DEC) {
>> - num_mbs = (ALIGN(inst->height, 16) * ALIGN(inst->width, 16)) / 256;
>> + num_mbs = ((ALIGN(inst->height, 16))/16 * (ALIGN(inst->width,
>> 16)))/16;
>
> Could you help me understand what is the difference between both
> calculations? IMO this patch should only change NUM_MBS_720P and
> NUM_MBS_4K macros.
>
We are updating the calculation here to match with the calculation used
in Macro.
AFAIK, we were seeing a size mismatch for a resolution with the old
calculation.
>> if (inst->hfi_codec == HFI_VIDEO_CODEC_MPEG2 ||
>> - inst->pic_struct != HFI_INTERLACE_FRAME_PROGRESSIVE ||
>> - num_mbs <= NUM_MBS_720P)
>> + inst->pic_struct != HFI_INTERLACE_FRAME_PROGRESSIVE ||
>> + num_mbs <= NUM_MBS_720P)
>
> This change just makes indentation wrong and also it is not related to
> the patch subject.
I think it can be dropped.
>
>> mode = VIDC_WORK_MODE_1;
>> } else {
>> num_mbs = (ALIGN(inst->out_height, 16) * ALIGN(inst->out_width,
>> 16)) / 256;
>> if (inst->hfi_codec == HFI_VIDEO_CODEC_VP8 &&
>> - num_mbs <= NUM_MBS_4K)
>> + num_mbs <= NUM_MBS_4K)
>
> ditto
Same here.
>
>> mode = VIDC_WORK_MODE_1;
>> }
>>
>>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists