search for: c64xx

Thanks Jean-Marc. Is there a Speex trunk for the C64xx I can use? Or do I have to figure what options to turn on (in configure) when building the library? Thanks. Regards, Andy Ngo ----- Original Message ---- From: Jean-Marc Valin <jean-marc.valin@usherbrooke.ca> To: ndno72-speex@yahoo.com Cc: jtrantow@ieee.org; speex-dev@xiph.org Sent: Tue...

Andy Ngo wrote: > Thanks Jean-Marc. Is there a Speex trunk for the C64xx I can use? Or > do I have to figure what options > to turn on (in configure) when building the library? Thanks. Support is in the main version. Just look at the TI/ directory for extra TI-related stuff. Jean-Marc > Regards, > Andy Ngo > > ----- Original Message ---- > Fr...

...lsp_to_lpc 450 2076854 2076854 nb_encode 50 71523682 1938067 fir_mem2 50 1777450 1777450 cheb_poly_eva 9634 1564172 1564172 lsp_weight_quant 100 1032600 1032600 Does this make sense? I'm generating floating point code, using the optimizer, etc... Has anyone posted DM642, C64xx or C67xx benchmarks?

...eex format, and give it to the application on the ARM side via the shared memory; on the inbound flow (from ARM), the DSP gets encoded Speex data via the shared memory, decodes it and then plays it to the speaker. I know there's a Speex port for the TMS320VC5510 but will that port work for the C64xx series? Thanks. Regards Andy ----- Original Message ---- From: Jerry Trantow <jtrantow@ieee.org> To: ndno72-speex@yahoo.com; speex-dev@xiph.org Sent: Tuesday, December 5, 2006 1:55:13 PM Subject: RE: [Speex-dev] Speex support for TI DaVinci processor Do you need to encode and/or decode?...

Hi , I am trying to optimize OPUS codec to TI compiler C64XX in CCS. I have created the make file and compiled the code in optlevel = 3. The MIPS are pretty high(99 MIPS for 8Khz stereo) for LFE channels and the most MIPS intensive function is the silk_noise_shape_quantizer_del_dec() function. 1. I am trying to convert this entire function to assembly. I hav...

...faster. That's because some of the float ops get replaced by several int ops. > Does this make sense? > I'm generating floating point code, using the optimizer, etc... Are you sure the compiler isn't using float emulation or something like that? > Has anyone posted DM642, C64xx or C67xx benchmarks? I'm not aware of any. Jean-Marc

...faster. That's because some of the float ops get replaced by several int ops. > Does this make sense? > I'm generating floating point code, using the optimizer, etc... Are you sure the compiler isn't using float emulation or something like that? > Has anyone posted DM642, C64xx or C67xx benchmarks? I'm not aware of any. Jean-Marc

...be faster. That's because some of the float ops get replaced by several int ops. > Does this make sense? > I'm generating floating point code, using the optimizer, etc... Are you sure the compiler isn't using float emulation or something like that? > Has anyone posted DM642, C64xx or C67xx benchmarks? I'm not aware of any. Jean-Marc _______________________________________________ Speex-dev mailing list Speex-dev@xiph.org http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/speex-dev

...be faster. That's because some of the float ops get replaced by several int ops. > Does this make sense? > I'm generating floating point code, using the optimizer, etc... Are you sure the compiler isn't using float emulation or something like that? > Has anyone posted DM642, C64xx or C67xx benchmarks? I'm not aware of any. Jean-Marc _______________________________________________ Speex-dev mailing list Speex-dev@xiph.org http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/speex-dev

Hello! I'v downloaded speex lib 1.1.11.1. I am trying to port speex lib to Blackfin processor. I am using VisualDSP++ 4.0. If I am compiling source codes with using floating point everything ok. When I am compiling with FIXED_POINT defined everything's ok and code works about two times faster. But when I am defining BFIN_ASM I am getting several compiling errors in Blackfin assembler

...c >> >> Yes, that's the mode that I measured, with no VBR. Does 100 MIPS figure >> reflect the situation before >> or after David Rowe's improvements? > >I see around 26 MIPs for a TI C55x DSP for Quality 3 (8kbps), complexity 1, >and about 33 MIPs on a TI C64xx, with no assembly optimizations, using TI's >build tools. That is consistent with your 15kbps result. > >- Jim Pretty embarrassing for result for VLIW ): Yet another case of the difference between the practice and the theory. For 8kbps, complexity=1 I measured 25 MIPs for encoder +...

...{ r.m<<=1; r.e-=1; } } return(r); Here's my specific recommendation on norm_shift. /* Copyright (C) 2006, 2007 Applied Signal Processing, Inc. */ /** @author Jerry J. Trantow @file norm_ti64xx.h @brief Added norm_shift function and optimized for C64xx. */ /* Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions are met: - Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer....

-----Original Message----- From: Jean-Marc Valin [mailto:jean-marc.valin@usherbrooke.ca] Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2007 6:38 PM To: Michael Shatz Cc: speex-dev@xiph.org Subject: Re: [Speex-dev] Blackfin inline assembler and VisualDSP++ toolchain >> Yes, data footprint in the new version is quite manageable. Still I would >> wish better documentation for speex_alloc_scratch(). >

You might not be doing anything wrong. Speex is stateful and can get into a bad state sometimes. It's happened to me too, but not recently. And I've seen such bugs reported on this list and fixed. I suggest several approaches to solving the problem: 1) Try compiling Speex without compiler optimizations and see if the problem still occurs. Most likely it will, but this is an