This fixes two issues preventing suncc from building this code.
The undocumented 'a' operand modifier, causing gcc to omit a $ in
front of immediate operands (as required in addresses), is not
supported by suncc. Luckily, the also undocumented 'c' modifer
has the same effect and is supported.
On some asm statements with a large number of operands, suncc for no
obvious reason fails to correctly substitute some of the operands.
Fortunately, some of the operands in these statements are plain
numbers which can be inserted directly into the code block instead
of passed as operands.
With these changes, the code builds correctly with both gcc and
suncc.
Signed-off-by: Mans Rullgard <mans@mansr.com>
This code contains a C array of addresses of labels defined in
inline asm. To do this, the names must be declared as external
in C. The declared type does not matter since only the address is
used, and for some reason, the author of the code used the 'void'
type despite taking the address of a void expression being invalid.
Changing the type to char, a reasonable choice since the alignment
of the code labels cannot be known or guaranteed, eliminates gcc
warnings and allows building with suncc.
Signed-off-by: Mans Rullgard <mans@mansr.com>
many branches and cases of scale_vector are irrelevant for the case here
and by inlining they can be reliably removed.
Signed-off-by: Michael Niedermayer <michaelni@gmx.at>
It appears someone thinks this special case can be reached
Well, it cannot, thus not only do we not need to optimize it
we dont need it at all
Signed-off-by: Michael Niedermayer <michaelni@gmx.at>
Although a reasonable compiler will probably optimise out the
actual store and load, this operation still implies a truncation
to 16 bits which the compiler will probably not realise is not
necessary here.
Signed-off-by: Mans Rullgard <mans@mansr.com>
Writing the scaled excitation to a scratch buffer (borrowing the
'audio' array) instead of modifying it in place avoids the need
to save and restore the unscaled values.
Signed-off-by: Mans Rullgard <mans@mansr.com>
Use saturating addition functions instead of 64-bit intermediates
and separate clipping. This is much faster when dedicated
instructions are available.
Signed-off-by: Mans Rullgard <mans@mansr.com>
Firstly, nothing in this function can overflow 32 bits so the use
of a 64-bit type is completely unnecessary. Secondly, the scale
is either a power of two or 0x7fff. Doing separate loops for these
cases avoids using multiplications. Finally, since only the number
of bits, not the actual value, of the maximum value is needed, the
bitwise or of all the values serves the purpose while being faster.
It is worth noting that even if overflow could happen, it was not
handled correctly anyway.
Signed-off-by: Mans Rullgard <mans@mansr.com>
The operands in both cases are 16-bit so cannot overflow a 32-bit
destination. In gain_scale() the inputs are reduced to 14-bit,
so even the shift cannot overflow.
Signed-off-by: Mans Rullgard <mans@mansr.com>
Adding instead of subtracting the products in the loop allows the
compiler to generate more efficient multiply-accumulate instructions
when 16-bit multiply-subtract is not available. ARM has only
multiply-accumulate for 16-bit operands. In general, if only one
variant exists, it is usually accumulate rather than subtract.
In the same spirit, using the dedicated saturation function enables
use of any special optimised versions of this.
Signed-off-by: Mans Rullgard <mans@mansr.com>
C++ does not allow to mix different enums, so e.g. code comparing
ACodecID with CodecID would fail to compile with gcc.
This very evil hack should fix this problem.
Boris Maksalov
Mans Rullgard
Speedy Gonzales
Michael Niedermayer
Paul B Mahol
Nicolas George
Derek Buitenhuis
Diego Biurrun
Anton Khirnov