Displaying 20 results from an estimated 900 matches similar to: "Small mistake in celt_types.h for MacOS X"
2010 Mar 03
2
uint decode error on visual studio...
Is this a common warning? The decoder doesn't return an error on it, but I
see it a lot in my test application on windows. It is non existent on my
linux box. I haven't tried mingw yet.
please note that I'm using visual studio 2008 w/the vcproj that Bjoern
Rasmussen made for 0.5.2 (w/some file references removed) at the moment and
it is giving a lot of C4554 warnings
2009 Jun 30
3
Delays estimation in Speex algorithms
Speex tells me that the decoder is always 5 ms, but it says that the
encoder is 5 ms for NB, 8.9375 ms for WB, and 10.90625 ms for UWB. Is
there an extra frame of delay in the encoder that isn't otherwise
accounted for?
John Ridges
Jean-Marc Valin wrote:
> Quoting John Ridges <jridges at masque.com>:
>
>> I also need to know the precise delays from Speex but I used
2015 Nov 13
2
[Aarch64 00/11] Patches to enable Aarch64
Thanks, I look forward to seeing what you find out. BTW, I was wondering
if you tried replacing the SIG2WORD16 macro using the vqmovns_s32
intrinsic? I'm sure it would be faster than the C code, but in the grand
scheme of things it might not make much difference.
On 11/13/2015 12:15 PM, Jonathan Lennox wrote:
>> On Nov 13, 2015, at 1:51 PM, John Ridges <jridges at masque.com>
2009 Jul 22
2
A technical question about the speex preprocessor.
By my reckoning the confluent hypergoemetric functions should have the
following values:
M(-.25;1;-.5) = 1.11433
M(-.25;1;-1) = 1.21088
M(-.25;1;-1.5) = 1.29385
M(-.25;1;-2) = 1.36627
M(-.25;1;-2.5) = 1.43038
M(-.25;1;-3) = 1.48784
M(-.25;1;-3.5) = 1.53988
M(-.25;1;-4) = 1.58747
M(-.25;1;-4.5) = 1.63134
M(-.25;1;-5) = 1.67206
M(-.25;1;-5.5) = 1.71009
M(-.25;1;-6) = 1.74579
M(-.25;1;-6.5) =
2009 Jul 22
2
A technical question about the speex preprocessor.
I got the approximation from a Google book:
http://books.google.com/books?id=2CAqsF-RebgC&pg=PA385
Page 392, formula (10.33)
Using this formula, you're right, hypergeom_gain() would *not* converge
to 1 for large x, but would instead be gamma(1.25)/sqrt(sqrt(x)) which
would approach zero. Now if the formula for the hypergeometric gain were
instead gamma(1.5) * M(-.5;1;-x) / sqrt(x)
2015 Nov 13
2
[Aarch64 00/11] Patches to enable Aarch64
Hi Jonathan,
I'm sorry to bring this up again, and I don't want to beat a dead horse,
but I was very surprised by your benchmarks so I took a little closer look.
I think what's happening is that it's a little unfair to compare the
ARM64 inline assembly to the C code, because looking at the C macros in
"fixed_generic.h" for MULT16_32_Q16 and MULT16_32_Q15 you find
2009 Jun 30
3
Delays estimation in Speex algorithms
JM,
I also need to know the precise delays from Speex but I used the
SPEEX_GET_LOOKAHEAD control requests to determine them (plus the
"speex_resampler_get_output_latency" function from the resampler). The
returned values from the Speex lookahead request don't seem to match
with the values you gave Alexander. Am I doing this wrong? Thanks,
John Ridges
speex-dev-request at
2015 Nov 12
2
[Aarch64 00/11] Patches to enable Aarch64
One other minor thing: I notice that in the inline assembly the result
(rd) is constrained as an earlyclobber operand. What was the reason for
that?
2010 Mar 25
0
Blackfin inline assembly for fixed math
Here some Blackfin inline assembly, mainly picked and adapted from
speex. It's helps a little on my BF537 eval board.
Julien
--------
/**
@file fixed_bfin.h
@brief Fixed-point operations for the ADI BF5xx DSP family
*/
/*
Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without
modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions
are met:
-
2009 Jul 22
2
A technical question about the speex preprocessor.
Thanks for the confirmation Jean-Marc. I kind of suspected from the
comments that it was the confluent hypergoemetric function, which I was
trying to evaluate using Kummer's equation, namely:
M(a;b;x) is the sum from n=0 to infinity of (a)n*x^n / (b)n*n!
where (a)n = a(a+1)(a+2) ... (a+n-1)
But when I use Kummer's equation, I don't get the values in the
"hypergeom_gain"
2015 Mar 12
2
[RFC PATCHv2] Intrinsics/RTCD related fixes. Mostly x86.
Nit: in dual_inner_prod_sse, why not do both horizontal sums at the same
time? As in:
xsum1 = _mm_add_ps(_mm_movelh_ps(xsum1, xsum2),
_mm_movehl_ps(xsum2, xsum1));
xsum1 = _mm_add_ps(xsum1, _mm_shuffle_ps(xsum1, xsum1, 0xf5));
_mm_store_ss(xy1, xsum1);
_mm_store_ss(xy2, _mm_movehl_ps(xsum1, xsum1));
--John
2015 Nov 20
2
[Aarch64 00/11] Patches to enable Aarch64
> On Nov 19, 2015, at 5:47 PM, John Ridges <jridges at masque.com> wrote:
>
> Any speedup from the intrinsics may just be swamped by the rest of the encode/decode process. But I think you really want SIG2WORD16 to be (vqmovns_s32(PSHR32((x), SIG_SHIFT)))
Yes, you?re right. I forgot to run the vectors under qemu with my previous version (oh, the embarrassment!) Fixed forthcoming
2010 Jul 01
4
(no subject)
Jean-Mark, Tim,
Could either of you expound on the following comment in cwrs.c?
/*If _k==0, the following do-while loop will overflow the buffer.*/
----------------------------------------------------------------
...because the following do-loop does overflow the buffer when k=126
k=2;
do _u[k]=(k<<1)-1;
while(++k<len);
Thanks,
MikeH
-------------- next
2011 Mar 03
0
[PATCH] Eliminate the ec_int32 and ec_uint32 typedefs.
These were used because the entropy coder originally came from
outside libcelt, and thus did not have a common type system.
It's now undergone enough modification that it's not ever likely to
be used as-is in another codec without some porting effort, so
there's no real reason to maintain the typedefs separately.
Hopefully we'll replace these all again somedate with a common set
2015 Nov 10
3
[Aarch64 00/11] Patches to enable Aarch64
Since you're already set up for benchmarks, I would ask if you could
benchmark the difference between using and not using the ARM64 inline
assembly. I believe the original justification on ARMv7 for the assembly
was the processor's panoply of multiply instructions and their long
cycle times. It seems to me that the ARM64 processor is much more like
an x86 one, where using a
2011 May 04
1
V8.1 Fixed Point
I realize this is ancient history, but I am trying to compile Ver 8.1 (from
the download page) using Fixed Point and am getting compile errors as
follows:
argument of type "celt_sig *" is incompatible with parameter of type
"celt_int16 *" libcelt81_orig_DSP/libcelt celt.c line 321
1304524612394 19769
argument of type "celt_sig *" is incompatible
2015 Nov 23
1
[Aarch64 v2 05/18] Add Neon intrinsics for Silk noise shape quantization.
On Nov 23, 2015, at 12:04 PM, John Ridges <jridges at masque.com<mailto:jridges at masque.com>> wrote:
Hi Jonathan.
I really, really hate to bring this up this late in the game, but I just noticed that your NEON code doesn't use any of the "high" intrinsics for ARM64, e.g. instead of:
int32x4_t coef1 = vmovl_s16(vget_high_s16(coef16));
you could use:
int32x4_t coef1
2010 Nov 16
1
Possible bug in "pitch_downsample"
Hi Jean-Marc,
I could be way off base here, but it seems to me that line 115 in
pitch.c in the function "pitch_downsample":
x_lp[i] =
SHR32(HALF32(HALF32(x[1][(2*i-1)]+x[1][(2*i+1)])+x[1][2*i]), SIG_SHIFT+2);
should actually be:
x_lp[i] +=
SHR32(HALF32(HALF32(x[1][(2*i-1)]+x[1][(2*i+1)])+x[1][2*i]), SIG_SHIFT+2);
Sorry if I'm totally misreading things and just
2010 Aug 18
1
The high complexity mode.
Hi Jean-Marc,
I'd just like to put in a vote that I wish you'd left in the
high-complexity mode in CELT (with the assumption that it could be
conditionally compiled out for the IETF standard codec). It seems like
it makes it a more useful standalone codec in Xiph's arsenal, and from
my own viewpoint I'm uncertain I'll be able to use the SILK codec
because of the patent
2010 Dec 21
2
A Question about VBR
Congrats to the team for 0.10.0. It sounds really good in the tests I've
done so far. I'm really looking forward to the 1.0 release.
One question though: could you explain briefly the difference between
VBR and unconstrained VBR? And, in my case, the $64K question: is there
any situation where CELT could produce more data than specified by
nbCompressedBytes when encoding?
Thanks