search for: abs32

...wait if it's too late for 1.2 release. Assuming there's no issue with the patches, next week isn't too late. Also, I've started looking at your patches. So far there's one thing that puzzles me a bit. In the OPUS_CHECK_ASM section of patch 0004, you have: + celt_assert(ABS32(xy1_c - *xy1) <= VERY_SMALL); Given the normal range of the values (the xy values are often much larger than one) and the precision involved here (24-bit mantissa), it seems like this test can only succeed if the two values are actually equal. Is the float patch actually bit-exact? If so, then...

...ease. > > Assuming there's no issue with the patches, next week isn't too late. > > Also, I've started looking at your patches. So far there's one thing > that puzzles me a bit. In the OPUS_CHECK_ASM section of patch 0004, you > have: > > + celt_assert(ABS32(xy1_c - *xy1) <= VERY_SMALL); > > Given the normal range of the values (the xy values are often much > larger than one) and the precision involved here (24-bit mantissa), it > seems like this test can only succeed if the two values are actually > equal. Is the float patch actually...

...there's no issue with the patches, next week isn't too late. >> >> Also, I've started looking at your patches. So far there's one thing >> that puzzles me a bit. In the OPUS_CHECK_ASM section of patch 0004, you >> have: >> >> + celt_assert(ABS32(xy1_c - *xy1) <= VERY_SMALL); >> >> Given the normal range of the values (the xy values are often much >> larger than one) and the precision involved here (24-bit mantissa), it >> seems like this test can only succeed if the two values are actually >> equal. Is the...

...patches, next week isn't too late. > >> > >> Also, I've started looking at your patches. So far there's one thing > >> that puzzles me a bit. In the OPUS_CHECK_ASM section of patch 0004, you > >> have: > >> > >> + celt_assert(ABS32(xy1_c - *xy1) <= VERY_SMALL); > >> > >> Given the normal range of the values (the xy values are often much > >> larger than one) and the precision involved here (24-bit mantissa), it > >> seems like this test can only succeed if the two values are actually &gt...

Hi Jean-Marc, I attached the new version in inner_prod_5patches_v2.zip which synced to the current master. For fixed-point ARM, only 0003-Optimize-fixed-point-celt _inner_prod-and-dual_inner_.patch changes the performance. For floating-point ARM, only 0004-Optimize-floating-point-c elt_inner_prod-and-dual_inn.patch changes the performance. Patch 1 and 2 are code clean-up and can only affect x86