similar to: [RFC PATCH v2] Encode optimize using libNe10

On 25 February 2015 at 19:54, Timothy B. Terriberry <tterribe at xiph.org> wrote: > Viswanath Puttagunta wrote: >> >> Can we please have review on RFCv2? We have quite a few optimizations >> (Eg: ifft/mdct_backwards, fixed point fft/ifft mdct_forward/backward >> etc) that are in my pipeline that depend on this patch series being >> accepted. > > >

Hi Timothy and Viswanath, > FYI, I got Phil @ ARM to independently verify for any compile/link > warning/errors and he said he did not find any... And since I haven't > heard from you for a week, I went ahead and pushed RFCv3. Yes, I do get it built without compile/link warning/errors. To save some time, please turn off other modules in Ne10 Open $NE10_DIR/CMakeLists.txt and find

Viswanath Puttagunta wrote: > Can we please have review on RFCv2? We have quite a few optimizations > (Eg: ifft/mdct_backwards, fixed point fft/ifft mdct_forward/backward > etc) that are in my pipeline that depend on this patch series being > accepted. So, trying to make progress on this... On an armv7l board running Ubuntu, you've broken the build with just --enable-intrinsics

Hello opus-dev, Can we please have review on RFCv2? We have quite a few optimizations (Eg: ifft/mdct_backwards, fixed point fft/ifft mdct_forward/backward etc) that are in my pipeline that depend on this patch series being accepted. Regards, Vish On 4 February 2015 at 12:21, Viswanath Puttagunta <viswanath.puttagunta at linaro.org> wrote: > Changes from RFC PATCH v1: > - passing

Hi Timothy, Do you prefer configuration you mentioned before: $ configure --host=arm-linux-gnueabihf --enable-intrinsics \ --with-NE10-libraries=<path>/armv7_root/binary/usr/local/lib \ --with-NE10-includes=<path>//armv7_root/binary/usr/local/include/Ne10 Instead of $ configure --enable-intrinsics \ --with-NE10-libraries=$HOME/src/xiph/git/arm/Ne10/build/modules \

Hi Timothy, Appreciate the comprehensive code review. The biggest issue I see is the peak stack usage.... rest looks like fairly straight forward cleanup. Is the peak stack usage a complete blocker in current form? If it is indeed a blocker, would it be acceptable if we can reduce additional buffer requirement from 2 buffers (current) to 1, possibly by moving scaling inside

Hi Viswanath, Great to see it coming. > Phil, > > As you mentioned earlier, could you please address all > compile and linker errors/warnings coming out of Ne10 library? [Phil Wang] OK, I will deliver it. But I will try to add -funsafe-math-optimisations flag to our build system first. Also I will have a look into our build system on Linux. From your previous response, I guess there

Hi Timothy, Sorry for late reply. I have upstreamed the patch to fix the regression here: https://github.com/projectNe10/Ne10/commit/ee5d856cd9cb8c4a15ace567df4239f4e788d043 I have tested it with Vish's branch: http://git.linaro.org/people/viswanath.puttagunta/opus.git/shortlog/refs/heads/rfcv3_fft_fixed) Both unit test dft and unit test mdct passed on ARM v7/v8, floating point/fixed

Hello Jean-Marc, **Resending.. not sure why subject got removed earlier** Below are the results that show test_unit_dft passes, but test_unit_mdct fails (only for nfft=480, 960, 1920) Note: Tested on BeagleboneBlack(Cortex-A8) fixed point on branch [1] ./test_unit_dft nfft=32 inverse=0,snr = 88.394372 nfft=32 inverse=1,snr = 93.896470 nfft=128 inverse=0,snr = 89.185895 nfft=128 inverse=1,snr =

Hello Jean-Marc, Yep, that was it.. with your patch, test_unit_mdct passes for all nfft. So, what you do you suggest the next step here is? Regards, Vish On 8 May 2015 at 12:30, Jean-Marc Valin <jmvalin at jmvalin.ca> wrote: > Hi, > > Can you apply this change to the MDCT test and run it again. See if more > (all) sizes pass. Given the results, I strongly suspect an

Hi, Can you apply this change to the MDCT test and run it again. See if more (all) sizes pass. Given the results, I strongly suspect an overflow. Jean-Marc On 08/05/15 01:21 PM, Viswanath Puttagunta wrote: > Hello Jean-Marc, > > Below are the results that show test_unit_dft passes, but > test_unit_mdct fails (only for nfft=480, 960, 1920) > Note: Tested on

Hello Timothy, Just FYI, Phil at ARM is still looking into why mdct is failing.. will keep you posted. In the mean time, do you want me to disable NE10 for mdct_forward and re-submit the patchset so we may make progress? Regards, Vish On 30 April 2015 at 09:33, Viswanath Puttagunta <viswanath.puttagunta at linaro.org> wrote: > > On 29 April 2015 at 17:22, Timothy B. Terriberry

Hello Timothy, Great to hear from you! Fired up my hardware today and this issue looks like a regression in Ne10 library. The commit in Ne10 [1] that I tested to be working successfully back in May 5b63074db45000f9688460990ee3f5e147d93782 which is the Patch Phil at ARM added to fix the overflow issue in nfft=60 case. After git-bisect, looks like the culprit patch in Ne10 [1] is

Hello Jean-Marc, Below are the results that show test_unit_dft passes, but test_unit_mdct fails (only for nfft=480, 960, 1920) Note: Tested on BeagleboneBlack(Cortex-A8) fixed point on branch [1] ./test_unit_dft nfft=32 inverse=0,snr = 88.394372 nfft=32 inverse=1,snr = 93.896470 nfft=128 inverse=0,snr = 89.185895 nfft=128 inverse=1,snr = 93.537021 nfft=256 inverse=0,snr = 88.353151 nfft=256

Hello Jonathan, Just FYI, I started doing review of your patch and will get back to you in few days. After review, I would like to rebase your patch (as necessary) myself and do some testing.. and re-submit. Regards, Vish On 4 March 2015 at 09:00, Viswanath Puttagunta <viswanath.puttagunta at linaro.org> wrote: > > On 3 March 2015 at 22:17, Jonathan Lennox <jonathan at

Viswanath Puttagunta wrote: > if OPUS_ARM_NEON_INTR > CELT_ARM_NEON_INTR_OBJ = $(CELT_SOURCES_ARM_NEON_INTR:.c=.lo) \ > - %test_unit_rotation.o %test_unit_mathops.o > -$(CELT_ARM_NEON_INTR_OBJ): CFLAGS += $(OPUS_ARM_NEON_INTR_CPPFLAGS) > + $(CELT_SOURCES_ARM_NE10:.c=.lo) \ > + %test_unit_rotation.o %test_unit_mathops.o \ > +

Hello Thomas, I use the following configure command to link against Ne10 Eg: configure --host=arm-linux-gnueabihf --enable-intrinsics --with-NE10-libraries=${BUILD_NE10_LIB} --with-NE10-includes=${BUILD_NE10_INC}" So, in my normal testing, I explicitly specify where the NE10 header files are installed and where the NE10 libraries are installed. Looking back at configure.ac

On 3 March 2015 at 22:17, Jonathan Lennox <jonathan at vidyo.com> wrote: > > On Mar 3, 2015, at 11:08 PM, Viswanath Puttagunta > <viswanath.puttagunta at linaro.org> wrote: > > > > On 3 March 2015 at 21:59, Jonathan Lennox <jonathan at vidyo.com> wrote: >> >> Viswenath, >> >> My patch should be against the tip, but it?s the very recent

Hello All, I extended the libNE10 optimizations for float towards mdct_backwards/opus_ifft. I am able to get about 14.26% improvement for Decode use case now on my Beaglebone Black. Please see [1] for measurements. Questions 1. Since this patch needs to go in after Encode [2] patch) should I submit this as patch series? 2. Since Jonathan Lennox posted intrinsics cleanup [3] patch, should

Hi everyone, I am working on Ne10 project. Ne10 provides NEON optimized FFT routines that are much faster (compared to those without NEON), on most ARMv7-A and all ARMv8-A devices. How about integrate it into Opus? I am not familiar with configure script, but I find "Optinal Packages" in it. If we provides --with-ne10-fft option, the one extra thing that users need to do is to