search for: celt_inner_prod

Hi, Attached are 5 patches related to celt_inner_prod() and dual_inner_prod() NEON intrinsics optimization. In 0004-Optimize-floating-point-celt_inner_prod-and-dual_inn.patch, the optimization changed the order of floating-point inner products, which will change the results. I created celt_inner_prod_neon_float_c_simulation() and dual_inner_prod_neon...

...ny) for each of your patches? Also, are these > all the patches you intend to merge for 1.2 or are there more upcoming > ones? > > Cheers, > > Jean-Marc > > On 01/06/17 06:33 PM, Linfeng Zhang wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Attached are 5 patches related to celt_inner_prod() > > and dual_inner_prod() NEON intrinsics optimization. > > > > In 0004-Optimize-floating-point-celt_inner_prod-and-dual_inn.patch, the > > optimization changed the order of floating-point inner products, which > > will change the results. I > > created celt_in...

...ge them. Cheers, Jean-Marc > > Out of curiosity, what’s the CPU in the Chromebook you’re using to > test? > >> On Jun 1, 2017, at 6:33 PM, Linfeng Zhang <linfengz at google.com> >> wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> Attached are 5 patches related to celt_inner_prod() and >> dual_inner_prod() NEON intrinsics optimization. >> >> In 0004-Optimize-floating-point-celt_inner_prod-and-dual_inn.patch, >> the optimization changed the order of floating-point inner >> products, which will change the results. I created >> celt_inner_p...

Yes, Thank you. I'll follow up with the AVX code and tests for pitch code. Radu -----Original Message----- From: opus-bounces at xiph.org [mailto:opus-bounces at xiph.org] On Behalf Of Timothy B. Terriberry Sent: Thursday, November 5, 2015 10:31 AM To: opus at xiph.org Subject: Re: [opus] AVX Optimizations Velea, Radu wrote: > I've created a pull request[1] to enable configuration

On 05/06/17 03:28 PM, Linfeng Zhang wrote: > 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-celt_inner_prod-and-dual_inn.patch changes the performance. Got any numbers? Cheers, Jean-Marc > Patch 1 and 2 are code clean-up and can only affect x86 performance. >...

..._map tables, for the same reason we didn’t want it in the arm_silk_map tables. Out of curiosity, what’s the CPU in the Chromebook you’re using to test? > On Jun 1, 2017, at 6:33 PM, Linfeng Zhang <linfengz at google.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > Attached are 5 patches related to celt_inner_prod() and dual_inner_prod() NEON intrinsics optimization. > > In 0004-Optimize-floating-point-celt_inner_prod-and-dual_inn.patch, the optimization changed the order of floating-point inner products, which will change the results. I created celt_inner_prod_neon_float_c_simulation() and dual_inner...

...;linfengz at google.com > <mailto:linfengz at google.com>> wrote: > > 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-celt_inner_prod-and-dual_inn.pa > <http://elt_inner_prod-and-dual_inn.pa>tch changes the performance. > Patch 1 and 2 are code clean-up and can onl...

...> Out of curiosity, what’s the CPU in the Chromebook you’re using to > > test? > > > >> On Jun 1, 2017, at 6:33 PM, Linfeng Zhang <linfengz at google.com> > >> wrote: > >> > >> Hi, > >> > >> Attached are 5 patches related to celt_inner_prod() and > >> dual_inner_prod() NEON intrinsics optimization. > >> > >> In 0004-Optimize-floating-point-celt_inner_prod-and-dual_inn.patch, > >> the optimization changed the order of floating-point inner > >> products, which will change the results. I creat...

...to:linfengz at google.com>> wrote: > > > > 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-celt_inner_prod-and-dual_inn.pa > > <http://elt_inner_prod-and-dual_inn.pa>tch changes the performance. > > Patch 1 and 2 are...

...e know what's the expected effect on performance (if any) for each of your patches? Also, are these all the patches you intend to merge for 1.2 or are there more upcoming ones? Cheers, Jean-Marc On 01/06/17 06:33 PM, Linfeng Zhang wrote: > Hi, > > Attached are 5 patches related to celt_inner_prod() > and dual_inner_prod() NEON intrinsics optimization. > > In 0004-Optimize-floating-point-celt_inner_prod-and-dual_inn.patch, the > optimization changed the order of floating-point inner products, which > will change the results. I > created celt_inner_prod_neon_float_c_simulat...

...e >> all the patches you intend to merge for 1.2 or are there more upcoming >> ones? >> >> Cheers, >> >> Jean-Marc >> >> On 01/06/17 06:33 PM, Linfeng Zhang wrote: >> > Hi, >> > >> > Attached are 5 patches related to celt_inner_prod() >> > and dual_inner_prod() NEON intrinsics optimization. >> > >> > In 0004-Optimize-floating-point-celt_inner_prod-and-dual_inn.patch, the >> > optimization changed the order of floating-point inner products, which >> > will change the results. I >&...

...Y_HAVE_SSE4_1(xcorr_kernel) /* avx */ }; #endif #if (defined(OPUS_X86_MAY_HAVE_SSE4_1) && !defined(OPUS_X86_PRESUME_SSE4_1)) || \ (!defined(OPUS_X86_MAY_HAVE_SSE_4_1) && defined(OPUS_X86_MAY_HAVE_SSE2) && !defined(OPUS_X86_PRESUME_SSE2)) opus_val32 (*const CELT_INNER_PROD_IMPL[OPUS_ARCHMASK + 1])( const opus_val16 *x, const opus_val16 *y, int N ) = { celt_inner_prod_c, /* non-sse */ celt_inner_prod_c, MAY_HAVE_SSE2(celt_inner_prod), MAY_HAVE_SSE4_1(celt_inner_prod), /* sse4.1 */ + MAY_H...

...MAY_HAVE_SSE4_1(xcorr_kernel) /* avx */ }; #endif #if (defined(OPUS_X86_MAY_HAVE_SSE4_1) && !defined(OPUS_X86_PRESUME_SSE4_1)) || \ (!defined(OPUS_X86_MAY_HAVE_SSE_4_1) && defined(OPUS_X86_MAY_HAVE_SSE2) && !defined(OPUS_X86_PRESUME_SSE2)) opus_val32 (*const CELT_INNER_PROD_IMPL[OPUS_ARCHMASK + 1])( const opus_val16 *x, const opus_val16 *y, int N ) = { celt_inner_prod_c, /* non-sse */ celt_inner_prod_c, MAY_HAVE_SSE2(celt_inner_prod), MAY_HAVE_SSE4_1(celt_inner_prod), /* sse4.1 */ + MAY_H...

Thank Ulrich! Yes, using celt_assert(1.0 + celt_inner_prod_neon_float_c_simulation(x, y, N) == 1.0 + xy); celt_assert(1.0 + xy1_c == 1.0 + *xy1); celt_assert(1.0 + xy2_c == 1.0 + *xy2); can avoid the useage of VERY_SMALL. Hi Jean-Marc, I added { const opus_val32 xy_c = celt_inner_prod_neon_float_c_simulation(x, y, N);...

...; wrote: >> > >> > 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-celt_inner_prod-and-dual_inn.pa >> > <http://elt_inner_prod-and-dual_inn.pa>tch changes the performance. >> >...

Should call celt_inner_prod(). --- celt/bands.c | 7 ++++--- celt/bands.h | 2 +- celt/celt_encoder.c | 6 +++--- celt/pitch.c | 2 +- src/opus_multistream_encoder.c | 2 +- 5 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) diff --git a/celt/bands.c b/celt/ban...

...+#ifndef OVERRIDE_DUAL_INNER_PROD +# define dual_inner_prod(x, y01, y02, N, xy1, xy2, arch) \ + ((void)(arch),dual_inner_prod_c(x, y01, y02, N, xy1, xy2)) #endif /*We make sure a C version is always available for cases where the overhead of @@ -169,6 +172,12 @@ static OPUS_INLINE opus_val32 celt_inner_prod_c(const opus_val16 *x, ((void)(arch),celt_inner_prod_c(x, y, N)) #endif +#ifdef NON_STATIC_COMB_FILTER_CONST_C +void comb_filter_const_c(opus_val32 *y, opus_val32 *x, int T, int N, + opus_val16 g10, opus_val16 g11, opus_val16 g12); +#endif + + #ifdef FIXED_POINT opus_val32 #else @@ -...

...+#ifndef OVERRIDE_DUAL_INNER_PROD +# define dual_inner_prod(x, y01, y02, N, xy1, xy2, arch) \ + ((void)(arch),dual_inner_prod_c(x, y01, y02, N, xy1, xy2)) #endif /*We make sure a C version is always available for cases where the overhead of @@ -169,6 +172,12 @@ static OPUS_INLINE opus_val32 celt_inner_prod_c(const opus_val16 *x, ((void)(arch),celt_inner_prod_c(x, y, N)) #endif +#ifdef NON_STATIC_COMB_FILTER_CONST_C +void comb_filter_const_c(opus_val32 *y, opus_val32 *x, int T, int N, + opus_val16 g10, opus_val16 g11, opus_val16 g12); +#endif + + #ifdef FIXED_POINT opus_val32 #else @@ -...

The attached patch cleans up Opus's x86 intrinsics configury. It: * Makes ?enable-intrinsics work with clang and other non-GCC compilers * Enables RTCD for the floating-point-mode SSE code in Celt. * Disables use of RTCD in cases where the compiler targets an instruction set by default. * Enables the SSE4.1 Silk optimizations that apply to the common parts of Silk when Opus is built in

Hi All, Since I continue to base my work on top of Jonathan's patch, and my previous Ne10 fft/ifft/mdct_forward/backward patches, I thought it would be better to just post all new patches as a patch series. Please let me know if anyone disagrees with this approach. You can see wip branch of all latest patches at https://git.linaro.org/people/viswanath.puttagunta/opus.git Branch: