[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] configure+libm.h: add fmin/fmax/fminf/fmaxf emulation

[Muhammad Faiz]

On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 1:20 PM, Ganesh Ajjanagadde <gajjanag at mit.edu> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 12:54 PM, Muhammad Faiz <mfcc64 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 3:47 AM, Ganesh Ajjanagadde <gajjanag at mit.edu> wrote:
>>> On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 5:06 AM, Muhammad Faiz <mfcc64 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Sat, Oct 31, 2015 at 10:15 AM, Ganesh Ajjanagadde <gajjanag at mit.edu> wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 7:29 PM, Michael Niedermayer
>>>>> <michael at niedermayer.cc> wrote:
>>>>>> On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 06:53:34PM -0400, Ganesh Ajjanagadde wrote:
>>>>>>> On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 6:35 PM, Michael Niedermayer <michaelni at gmx.at> wrote:
>>>>>>> > From: Michael Niedermayer <michael at niedermayer.cc>
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > This should fix the build failure of avf_showcqt.c
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > An alternative solution would be to add a check for fmin/fmax to fate-source and
>>>>>>> > then to replace them by FFMIN/FFMAX, i can do that if preferred?
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > Untested due to lack of a affected platform
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I recall some interest on my end to get fmin, fmax etc for different
>>>>>>> reasons, and it was remarked that commit
>>>>>>> 4436a8f44dedc83767b3d9da9beb85d1fae2ca30 may be relevant. The summary
>>>>>>> seems to be that getting it to work on all platforms is not so simple.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> :/
>>>>>> ill replace the problematic ones by FFMIN/MAX for now so the build
>>>>>> failure on the affected msvc platforms is fixed
>>>>>> tieing a build fix to this complexity would be unwise
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I am definitely interested in getting it to work in order to replace
>>>>>>> FFMAX/FFMIN for floating point in especially libavfilter. This will
>>>>>>> allow better nan signalling at a slight performance cost.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> would that performance cost affect all systems or just ones not
>>>>>> having fmin/fmax ?
>>>>>> i think affecting all systems would be bad
>>>>>
>>>>> A correct fmin and fmax will be slower than FFMIN/FFMAX, simply
>>>>> because they do NaN handling. How much slower, I have not tested. Also
>>>>> note that flags may be passed to the compiler to ignore NaN's,
>>>>> something which can possibly be done locally if desired. However, I
>>>>> view FFMAX/FFMIN as the cleaner solution if NaN signalling/propagation
>>>>> is not an issue, so I may not pursue this.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Common problem with FFMIN/FFMAX (and other macros that evaluates
>>>> arguments more than once):
>>>> FFMAX(a, myfunc(b))
>>>> will call myfunc twice (OK compiler may optimize it and call myfunc once)
>>>> and often people don't care about it.
>>>
>>> That goes without saying, but sometimes compiler can't optimize due to
>>> sequence point stuff. This is why the macro should be used cautiously.
>>> However, FFmpeg devs are generally cautious about these things so I no
>>> longer press this that hard. The real technical benefit (if any) is
>>> the different NaN handling as noted above.
>>
>> Here some examples:
>> libavfilter/g729postfilter.c: 544
>>     *voicing = FFMAX(*voicing, long_term_filter(adsp, pitch_delay_int,
>>                                                 residual,
>> residual_filt_buf + 10,
>>                                                 subframe_size));
>>
>> others that call sqrt, strlen, etc (altough possibly compiler can optimize it)
>>
>> commit 94494dab910133106e80ece0f79935d78138e415
>> +        volume = FFABS(av_expr_eval(volume_expr, expr_vars_val, NULL));
>> I posted the patch, and I didn't noticed or warned that it is wrong.
>
> So on the note of FFABS - I think all floating point usages at least
> have been converted to proper C functions.
>
> Yes, things like this can be missed, and I personally use the libc
> variants unless there is no alternative.
> However, it was quite some work for me to convince others to use them,
> and I am trying to stay on the sidelines this time by not posting a
> patch for it.
>
OK, it is just matter of programming style, whatever we choose, has
advantages and deficiency.
The most important thing is that it is work.

Thank's