similar to: [PATCH] remove unused encoder buf in sb_celp.[hc]

Displaying 20 results from an estimated 300 matches similar to: "[PATCH] remove unused encoder buf in sb_celp.[hc]"

2005 May 25
1
Deallocation of buffers
I noticed that in the narrow band and wide band destroy functions only the main pointer is being freed. I think that it should be: void nb_decoder_destroy(void *state) { DecState *st; st=(DecState*)state; speex_free (st->inBuf); speex_free (st->excBuf); speex_free (st->innov); speex_free (st->interp_qlpc); speex_free (st->qlsp); speex_free
2005 Jun 22
2
Deallocation bug in speex
When updating the speex sources from svn tree, I found that the following revision has corrupted the deallocation (segmentation fault): ------------------------------------------------------------------------ r9320 | jm | 2005-05-27 15:05:05 -0300 (Fri, 27 May 2005) | 2 lines Proper de-allocation When compiling with the 9316, everything works fine. but when I update with later
2005 May 25
3
Speex on TI C6x, Problem with TI C5x Patch
Hi Jean-Marc, Hi Jim, I have also seen some problems with the 1.1.8 release on the C55x. So far I have boiled down the issues to the following: 1) We need our own "fixed_xx.h" header file. I don't know why, and haven't had time to investigate, but there is a definite improvement when I use the attached fixed_c55x.h file which has turned all the maths into inline functions.
2007 Mar 13
3
re: decoder issue in sb_celp
A little more info on this: I backtracked deeper into this and it looks like excBuf is corrupted, which is corrupted by low_innov_alias being invalid. However it is not entirely clear where that gets initialized (in sb_celp it is set to out+st->frame_size) Tom
2005 Jun 22
0
Deallocation bug in speex
Hi, So 9316 works and 9320 doesn't? How about latest SVN. I just ran everything in valgrind and saw no error at all. Can you give more info on how to reproduce (with speexenc)? Jean-Marc Le mercredi 22 juin 2005 ? 21:19 -0300, Dario Andrade a ?crit : > > > When updating the speex sources from svn tree, I found that the > following revision has corrupted the deallocation
2005 Feb 28
4
memory usage
On Mon, 2005-02-28 at 19:42 -0500, Jean-Marc Valin wrote: > > jean-marc: i think we can remove spx_sig_t *orig. > > but am not sure about exc2Buf. is it for extension? > > orig is already removed in SVN (which you should probably use). As for > exc2, it can be removed, but I'm not sure if you can just use exc > instead (maybe yes). > when removing "spx_sig_t
2005 Feb 19
2
memory usage
Hi I am currently trying to port speex v1.1.6 to a microcontroller with very limited memory (<64Kbyte RAM). what I found when initialising the encoder, a chunk of 32Kb was attempted to be alloced, which failed: src/nb_celp.c: void *nb_encoder_init(const SpeexMode *m) { /* snip */ st = (EncState*)speex_alloc(sizeof(EncState)+8000*sizeof(spx_sig_t)); /* snip */ } same goes for the
2005 Jun 06
1
Bug from revision 9316: SB_ENC_STACK misdefined
Revision 9316 introduced SB_ENC_STACK and friends, but misdefines SB_ENC_STACK to be too small, resulting in quite noticable artifacts in wideband mode as well as memory corruption and a crash (sooner or later). The patch below should return SB_ENC_STACK to be equal to what it replaced. Index: sb_celp.c =================================================================== --- sb_celp.c
2014 Feb 07
1
[PATCH] arm: Remove a superfluous 's' suffix from the cmp instruction
The 's' suffix on the cmp instruction is deprecated and superfluous since the cmp instruction always sets conditional flags. This fixes building for iOS with inline assembly enabled. --- libspeex/filters_arm4.h | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/libspeex/filters_arm4.h b/libspeex/filters_arm4.h index 7a74042..2c64625 100644 ---
2006 Jan 02
2
Speex decode memory usage on an Arm processor (wideband)
I am hoping to use Speex for a embedded project using Philips Arm processor (50 mips) 512kb flash 32kb ram. I found in the manual that decode takes about 0.5 mips so I should have enough processing power and I compiled the lib and it seems to take less then 64K so the only issue is memory usage. I have been testing the speex decode on windows looking at the stack usage and how much is malloc.
2006 Jan 03
1
Speex decode memory usage on an Arm processor (wideband)
> > I have tested lowering these values and then running the speexdec > > program and looking for errors. By trial and error it appears that I > > can lower MAX_CHARS_PER_FRAME = 750, SB_DEC_STACK = > > 750*sizeof(spx_sig_t) and NB_DEC_STACK = 250*sizeof(spx_sig_t) > > and not get any memory errors but have no idea if these are safe > > values or not. I
2005 Feb 28
2
memory usage
hi, jean-marc: i think we can remove spx_sig_t *orig. but am not sure about exc2Buf. is it for extension? rgds, tk On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 12:42:38 -0500, Jean-Marc Valin <Jean-Marc.Valin@usherbrooke.ca> wrote: > Hi, > > I looked at the code I think there are still places where you can reduce > memory. For example, I think bufSize can be reduced to around 400 > (instead of
2005 May 24
2
Speex on TI C6x, Problem with TI C5x Patch
Skipped content of type multipart/alternative-------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: maleout12may.wav Type: audio/wav Size: 95884 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.xiph.org/pipermail/speex-dev/attachments/20050524/57112d0c/maleout12may-0001.bin
2006 Dec 14
1
Would be nice to conditionally compile out coding modes and code tables...
> -----Original Message----- > From: Jean-Marc Valin [mailto:jean-marc.valin@usherbrooke.ca] > Sent: Thursday, December 14, 2006 2:51 AM > To: Miles, Stewart > Cc: speex-dev@xiph.org > Subject: Re: [Speex-dev] Would be nice to conditionally > compile out coding modes and code tables... > > Miles, Stewart a ?crit : > > I'm only using the narrow-band encoder
2005 Jan 25
1
"spx_word16_t *" is incompatible with parameter of type "float *"
Hi, I am bring SPEEX up on Analog Device's Blackfin (using Visual DSP++ tool set). The floating point was too slow on this fixed-point processor so I am going for the integer version. The floating point library build was very clean, but when I build with FIXED_POINT defined, the compiler exits when it find this discrepancy in \libspeex\cb_search.c : ".\libspeex\cb_search.c",
2008 Feb 19
4
Patch for Analog Devices compiler & fixed-point AGC
Hi Jean-Marc, As I told you, bank is a reserved keyword in Analog Devices compiler for Blackfin architecture. So we need to change the variables named bank to something else. Here's a patch that changes bank to bnk in the 3 concerned files. (Hope the format is OK) About my previous problems with the Blackfin: -> strange block repetition that could be cancelled by the AEC I was busy
2007 Jan 25
1
Minor fixed point scaling problem
First, let me say that I think the speex code is incredible in the way it supports floating and fixed point code from one set of code. The same is true for supporting multiple processors, etc... I've used speex with the PC, TI 64xx and 55xx. Please view the following comments not as an attack on speex (which I think is incredible!) but as my contribution to an open source project. I know
2008 Mar 29
0
GCC/ELF Visibility patch
Hi, I've attached a patch against SVN r14645 which adds GCC visibility information to all symbols exported from libspeex.so and libspeexdsp.so. It includes a configure.ac change to test that both the compiler flags and __attribute__((visibility)) works, and if so will #define EXPORT __attribute__((visibility("default"))) and if not #define EXPORT I've attached a diff output
2007 Jan 25
3
SV: How to detect SpeexBits corruption
You might not be doing anything wrong. Speex is stateful and can get into a bad state sometimes. It's happened to me too, but not recently. And I've seen such bugs reported on this list and fixed. I suggest several approaches to solving the problem: 1) Try compiling Speex without compiler optimizations and see if the problem still occurs. Most likely it will, but this is an
2005 May 25
3
Speex on TI C6x, Problem with TI C5x Patch
>> There is a bit of work remaining to get the memory usage down for a >> multichannel application. There have been some good posts over the >> last couple of months about reducing memory usage. > > I think 1.1.8 incorporates all memory reductions proposed. Let me know > otherwise. For the persistent storage, the only change that I have made is to MAX_CHARS_PER_FRAME,