-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 40
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
RPP Warp Perspective on HOST and HIP #451
base: develop
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
r-abishek
commented
Sep 18, 2024
•
edited
Loading
edited
- Updates version to RPP 1.9.6
- Adds tensor implementation for Warp Perspective on HOST and HIP
- Adds support for U8/F16/F32/I8 bit-depths with NHWC/NCHW and layout toggle support
- Adds relevant unit/perf tests
…k/rpp into opt_warp_perspective_rebased
Rebased version of warp perspective
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Added review comments
bool kernelSizeCase = (testCase == 49); | ||
bool dualInputCase = (testCase == 2 || testCase == 30 || testCase == 33 || testCase == 61 || testCase == 63 || testCase == 65 || testCase == 68); | ||
bool randomOutputCase = (testCase == 6 || testCase == 8 || testCase == 84); | ||
bool nonQACase = (testCase == 24); | ||
bool interpolationTypeCase = (testCase == 21 || testCase == 23 || testCase == 24 || testCase == 79); | ||
bool nonQACase = (testCase == 24 || testCase == 28); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
why this is added to nonQA
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Warp Affine and Perspective alone have some very minor precision related differences that don't match exactly. We's spent considerable cycles trying to match that minor difference, but its something to do with the _mm256_setr_ps instruction on computed float location indexes that differs from rawC. @HazarathKumarM You can put the sertr vs rawC values here.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I am confused. Is this going to be fixed?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Tested on HIP and HOST backend