Displaying 5 results from an estimated 5 matches for "silk_memcpi".
Did you mean:
silk_memcpy
2016 Jul 06
1
opus Digest, Vol 90, Issue 4
> I don't believe this is an actual error. If it's truly possible for
> these areas to overlap (I don't think it is), then something much more
> serious than using memmove instead of memcpy needs to be done about it.
In the C# version of this code, these two copy regions are stored in
separate arrays entirely. I agree that there should be no normal way to
have the memcpy
2016 Jul 04
1
[PATCH] SILK: use silk_memmove for potentially overlapping areas
Fixes CID 1227580
---
silk/process_NLSFs.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/silk/process_NLSFs.c b/silk/process_NLSFs.c
index c27cf03..d9123ef 100644
--- a/silk/process_NLSFs.c
+++ b/silk/process_NLSFs.c
@@ -100,6 +100,6 @@ void silk_process_NLSFs(
} else {
/* Copy LPC coefficients for first half from second half */
- silk_memcpy(
2016 Aug 23
0
[PATCH 8/8] Optimize silk_NSQ_del_dec() for ARM NEON
Created corresponding unit test, and the optimization is bit exact with C
function.
This optimization speeds up SILK encoder on NEON as following.
Fixed-point:
Complexity 0-5: 0%
Complexity 6-7: 6%
Complexity 8-9: 10%
Complexity 10: 8%
Got similar results on floating-point.
---
silk/NSQ_del_dec.c | 6 +-
silk/SigProc_FIX.h | 4
2016 Aug 23
2
[PATCH 7/8] Update NSQ_LPC_BUF_LENGTH macro.
NSQ_LPC_BUF_LENGTH is independent of DECISION_DELAY.
---
silk/define.h | 4 ----
1 file changed, 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/silk/define.h b/silk/define.h
index 781cfdc..1286048 100644
--- a/silk/define.h
+++ b/silk/define.h
@@ -173,11 +173,7 @@ extern "C"
#define MAX_MATRIX_SIZE MAX_LPC_ORDER /* Max of LPC Order and LTP order */
-#if( MAX_LPC_ORDER >
2016 Jul 14
6
Several patches of ARM NEON optimization
I rebased my previous 3 patches to the current master with minor changes.
Patches 1 to 3 replace all my previous submitted patches.
Patches 4 and 5 are new.
Thanks,
Linfeng Zhang