search for: opus_check_asm

Hi Ulrich, As Jean-mark recommended, we created "--enable-check-asm" config option to active OPUS_CHECK_ASM macros in the optimization, where the C function is called inside and the results of C and optimization functions are compared when encoding/decoding the real audio files. Thanks, Linfeng On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 11:46 PM, Ulrich Windl < Ulrich.Windl at rz.uni-regensburg.de> wrote: > &gt...

...e more patch set related to xcorr in next week. Please > don't 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 actual...

...gt;> Linfeng Zhang <linfengz at google.com> schrieb am 25.04.2017 um 01:52 in Nachricht <CAKoqLCDvAk7eeS-gpmqSHVxp4t-Lzzw7TLo5rRo=Ey_Q==cxGg at mail.gmail.com>: > Hi Ulrich, > > As Jean-mark recommended, we created "--enable-check-asm" config option to > active OPUS_CHECK_ASM macros in the optimization, where the C function is > called inside and the results of C and optimization functions are compared > when encoding/decoding the real audio files. My question was on the audio files: Considering that different code paths are used depending on the input material (...

...xcorr in next week. Please > > don't 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 suc...

...se >> > don't 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...

Hi, Attached are 2 patches related to silk_biquad_alt() optimization. Please review. Thanks, Linfeng Zhang -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.xiph.org/pipermail/opus/attachments/20170419/f08f5030/attachment-0001.html> -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name:

...t 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-bi...

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