similar to: Unifying fixed point and floating point

Displaying 20 results from an estimated 2000 matches similar to: "Unifying fixed point and floating point"

2005 Sep 26
1
Precomputing the remaining floating point operations.
I see there are still some floating point operations left in the codec init(ialization) code. Changing that code to fixed point is not only difficult (due to the trigonometric functions etc) but may also degrade the precision. Here is an idea whereby we can easily precompute (record) all those values on a powerful processor and then use (replay) them on an embedded processor / DSP. The only
2005 Sep 27
1
Precomputing the remaining floating pointoperations.
Firstly, running for more channels will not break my hack. All that's needed is to call RECOPLAY_MARK with different identifiers (say nb, wb or uwb) before doing the appropriate initialization. Secondly, my attempts to do the Gaussian in fixed point went like this : Define a new constant lag_factor_gauss that is manually set equal to exp(sqr(2*M_PI*lag_factor)/-2) by whoever changes the
2017 Nov 03
2
Fixed point modules in floating point
Hi, I was testing floating point Opus encoder. But it's calling few functions which are implemented in fixed point . I tried to find corresponding floating point functions in source. But not available. Please help me on this. Vega -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:
2004 Aug 06
1
fixed / floating point
I've noticed that the nb decoder uses floating point in several places even when using FIXED_POINT. I don't have to deal with lost packets, so I'm mainly interested in innov_gain and pgain in no transmission mode (nb_celp.c around line 1272) and g and exci in vocoder mode (around line 1557). Is there a reason that these places must use floating point, or would it be possible to
2017 Nov 03
0
Fixed point modules in floating point
On 11/03/2017 05:48 AM, Vega G wrote: > I was testing floating point  Opus encoder. But it's calling few > functions which are implemented in fixed point . I tried to find > corresponding floating point functions in source. But not available. > Please help me on this. The same code does both fixed-point and floating-point. If you define FIXED_POINT, then the macros and types
2014 Oct 15
1
Opus 1.1.1 beta breaks floating point integrity?
HI trying to build libopus beta compiler complains about more fixed point specific names referenced in common unconditional code Particularly: ./celt/x86/celt_lpc_sse.c(100): error: identifier "SIG_SHIFT" is undefined noA = EXTEND32(1) << SIG_SHIFT >> 1; ^ SIG_SHIFT is defined in arch.h provided FIXED_POINT is used (not on floating point
2011 Sep 01
0
[PATCH 5/5] resample: Add NEON optimized inner_product_single for floating point
From: Jyri Sarha <jsarha at ti.com> Also adds inline asm implementations of WORD2INT(x) macro for fixed and floating point. --- libspeex/resample_neon.h | 101 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 files changed, 101 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) diff --git a/libspeex/resample_neon.h b/libspeex/resample_neon.h index ba93e41..e7e981e 100644 --- a/libspeex/resample_neon.h +++
2005 Sep 22
1
Fw: Results of Automated Batch Tests
The results are at www.rational.co.za/speex.csv Each of the 11 quality settings is tested 3 times (narrow, wide and ultra wide band). Strangely narrow band quality 11 outperforms all wide band tests, but it can be due to my subsampling or some other inaudible effect like delaying. You can import it into Excel and sort it by SNR or other value. Divide the bits by 24 to get the bps. The
2017 Oct 10
1
Lock-up during boot when Logitech unifying receiver is connected (UEFI problem?)
Hi, I've got a bit of an issue after I switched to a new laptop for my CentOS 6.9 installation: I'm using a Logitech cordless keyboard and mouse that communicate with the system via a so-called "unifying receiver". If this unit (a small USB thingummy) is connected when I try to boot the system, it locks up completely. This happens before the GRUB screen is displayed. The
2008 Nov 23
0
Unifying mailing lists and bug trackers
Excuse the cross posting, but it underlines the entire point quite nicely. After the merge of Compiz and Beryl, we've still got two projects. That in itself isn't a huge problem, but it's a bit problematic with regards to mail (what list to choose?) and bug trackers. Since we get very little traffic on these e-mail lists, I suggest we shut down the dev@ list at
2010 Oct 21
1
[LLVMdev] [llvm-commits] Fwd: Proof of concept patch for unifying the .s/ELF emission of .ARM.attributes
2010/10/21 Jason Kim <jasonwkim at google.com>: > Of the 45 remaining, there are 4 interesting uses in MCAsmStreamer.cpp > - (I suppose for emitting data constants in a cross platform manner) > The other remaining uses are in AsmPrinter, again to do cross platform things. > It seems a bit strange to use a high level hammer to do ballpeen > work..... But when in Rome.... :-)
2010 Oct 23
0
[LLVMdev] Fwd: [llvm-commits] Fwd: Proof of concept patch for unifying the .s/ELF emission of .ARM.attributes
OK, after reading the docs I have some extra comments (and an updated patch). *) To support per section or per symbol attributes we would have to move this to the processing done in the end of the file. Lets not do this right now. *) We don't currently use any string attributes, so I did not implement them. *) Having an attribute emitter class is a nice way to separate the job of creating the
2010 Oct 25
1
[LLVMdev] Fwd: [llvm-commits] Fwd: Proof of concept patch for unifying the .s/ELF emission of .ARM.attributes
I also noticed that we were trying to optimize the output of 41 bytes of data :-) The attached patch is similar to the previous one but drops the API changes by just accumulating the attributes locally before outputting them. Cheers, Rafael -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: attrs.patch Type: text/x-patch Size: 12333 bytes Desc: not available URL:
2016 May 18
0
Re: [PATCH 1/2] src: start unifying version handling
On Tuesday 17 May 2016 15:45:42 Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 03:41:10PM +0200, Pino Toscano wrote: > > +extern bool guestfs_int_version_is (const struct version *v, int maj, int min, int mic); > > I think calling this function "is" is a bit misleading. I think > we should have _ge and _le functions (cf my patch). Makes sense, renamed to _ge.
2010 Mar 30
0
Unifying command line syntax
It would be nice to see a convention on ways to specify environments on the command line. Here are three to choose from: script/server -e test script/console test rake db:migrate RAILS_ENV=test -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. To post to this group, send email to
2010 Oct 21
1
[LLVMdev] [llvm-commits] Fwd: Proof of concept patch for unifying the .s/ELF emission of .ARM.attributes
2010/10/21 Jason Kim <jasonwkim at google.com>: > That is exactly what I need - I need a nice MC way to output a at > least two different 4 byte size fields after all of the blobs in the > .ARM.attributes are sent out. Hi Jason, If I got it right, you need to write to the attributes section after you have moved out to print the rest of the file. I can't think of an example
2016 May 17
2
Re: [PATCH 1/2] src: start unifying version handling
On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 03:41:10PM +0200, Pino Toscano wrote: > +extern bool guestfs_int_version_is (const struct version *v, int maj, int min, int mic); I think calling this function "is" is a bit misleading. I think we should have _ge and _le functions (cf my patch). This comparison for example is wrong: > /* qemu 1.1 claims to support virtio-scsi but in reality it's
2014 Feb 28
3
[LLVMdev] Unifying Windows Target Triples
On Feb 27, 2014, at 7:48 PM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at google.com> wrote: > I like this direction in general, but: Excellent! > On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 7:40 PM, Saleem Abdulrasool <abdulras at fb.com> wrote: > {armv7,i686,x86_64}-windows-{ia,mingw,ms}pe > > First a correction, I assume you mean: {armv7,i686,x86_64}-<vendor>-windows-{ia,mingw,ms}pe That
2010 Oct 21
0
[LLVMdev] [llvm-commits] Fwd: Proof of concept patch for unifying the .s/ELF emission of .ARM.attributes
On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 11:42 AM, Rafael Espíndola <rafael.espindola at gmail.com> wrote: >> Also what is the preferred method for MC way of setting out subsection >> sizes after the fact? I am guessing I need to use an MCFixup? >> How do I get an MCExpr to evaluate a method for the subsection size? >> Is there an equivalent use in the places using MCFixup? >>
2014 Aug 19
2
Logitech unifying receiver (pairing)
Hi, Is anyone here using a Logitech wireless mouse our keyboard or whatever using a "unifying receiver". Any luck with pairing new devices with the unit? I've tried various different programs from the net that's supposed to be able to do this, but they all fail in one way or the other. "pairing_tool" and "ltpair" will exit with a "broken pipe"