Displaying 3 results from an estimated 3 matches for "speex_asm".
2004 Aug 06
0
[PATCH] Make SSE Run Time option. Add Win32 SSE code
...gh and isn't very clean in some aspects. For example, the
order 10 filter is hard-coded and patched to work also for order 8 (less
efficiently). Also, I think this should really go into 1.1.x (to become
1.2). I have already found a faster implementation, which is not yet in
CVS BTW.
About your SPEEX_ASM flags, I'm not sure I see the difference between
SPEEX_ASM_MMX_SSE and SPEEX_ASM_MMX_SSE_FP. Also, you're saying that the
current code makes use of SSE2, which I don't think is the case, since I
developed it on a Pentium III, which only supports SSE1. I don't think
SSE2 is important...
2004 Aug 06
2
[PATCH] Make SSE Run Time option. Add Win32 SSE code
...a check based upon platform. It will compile in the
sse assembly if you are on an i?86 based platform by making a special
define. Second, it adds a new ctl value called SPEEX_SET_ASM_FLAG which
takes in an integer. The values are defined as:
#define SPEEX_SET_ASM_FLAG 200
#define SPEEX_ASM_MMX_NONE 0
#define SPEEX_ASM_MMX_BASIC 1
#define SPEEX_ASM_MMX_SSE 2
#define SPEEX_ASM_MMX_SSE_FP 4
The current Speex SSE code requires full SSE2 support which corresponds to
SPEEX_ASM_MMX_SSE_FP. None of the other defines are actively used, but they
are...
2004 Aug 06
2
[PATCH] Make SSE Run Time option. Add Win32 SSE code
...ean in some aspects. For example, the
>order 10 filter is hard-coded and patched to work also for order 8 (less
>efficiently). Also, I think this should really go into 1.1.x (to become
>1.2). I have already found a faster implementation, which is not yet in
>CVS BTW.
>
>About your SPEEX_ASM flags, I'm not sure I see the difference between
>SPEEX_ASM_MMX_SSE and SPEEX_ASM_MMX_SSE_FP. Also, you're saying that the
>current code makes use of SSE2, which I don't think is the case, since I
>developed it on a Pentium III, which only supports SSE1. I don't think
>S...