similar to: Shoehorning speex is confusing a newbie

Mike, Generally "Invalid mode encounterd" == "frames are misaligned" You should be getting 20 bytes from the encoder each time, and passing 20 bytes to the decoder each time. Is it correct that you have modeled your main loop after testenc-TI-c5x.c? If you look at encoded silence with a binary editor, you should be able to see the 20-byte repetition pattern. You can also

Jean-Marc was correct in that the 16bit value was the culprit for my encoding woes. after I changed that to a 32 bit value I believe it encodes correctly, but I really don't have much of any way to know this absolutely. I am using the 1.2beta2. I would use the enctest program, I have looked it over and based a lot of what I am doing on that code but the project I am developing this on is

This is going to take some explaining and I apologize in advance if any of this is found in the manual or sample code but I couldn't find it. I just graduated last may and this is my first experience with vocoders and dissecting a professional's code. I work for a company that is currently using a G729A vocoder from a 3rd party software company and is looking into speex so they no

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.

Jean-Marc, I dug into this further, and found that the warning occurred when PSHR32 had a shift greater than 15. in fixed_generic.h, PSHR32 is defined as: #define PSHR32(a,shift) (SHR32((a)+((1<<((shift))>>1)),shift)) For 16-bit compilers the "1" needs a cast: #define PSHR32(a,shift) (SHR32((a)+((EXTEND32(1)<<((shift))>>1)),shift)) This change fixed the

Hi Jim, Thanks a lot for investigating. It definitely makes sense now. I'll fix the problem now. Is there any other place where you see that same (or similar) problem? Jean-Marc Jim Crichton a ?crit : > Jean-Marc, > > I dug into this further, and found that the warning occurred when PSHR32 > had a shift greater than 15. > > in fixed_generic.h, PSHR32 is defined as: >

I looked back at my old C55 EC build, and I had the same warning in mdf.c which Mike found. The assembly code did have a valid shift, and this build did cancel echo. When I built with the SVN head, I saw the errors in kiss_fft.c also. The assembly there also has valid shifts. So, I suspect that these warnings do not indicate a real problem. It might be interesting to break down the

Thanks Jim for looking into that, I was really starting to wonder what was going on. Let me know if you find a way to tell the compiler to stop complaining. Jean-Marc Jim Crichton a ?crit : > I looked back at my old C55 EC build, and I had the same warning in > mdf.c which Mike found. The assembly code did have a valid shift, and > this build did cancel echo. > > When I built

Dear Speex developers, I am currently experimenting with Speex on Symbian smartphones. I have compiled the Speex library, and I am now using it in the following way: 1. Record 320-byte buffers of data in PCM16 format, 8000 Hz sampling rate. 2. Feed the resulting buffer to an instance of a narrowband Speex encoder. 3. Send the encoded data over RTP. 4. Upon receiving on the other side, feed the

Jim Crichton a ?crit : > I played briefly with the echo canceller on the C5509A back in May > 2006. I got the same compiler warnings, and sent a message to the > list which included this: > > "I got several compiler warnings for "shift out of range" in mdf.c, > which I fixed by adding EXTEND32 to all of the SHL32s with 16 bit > operands (st->frame_size in 6

On Thu, 2003-04-17 at 07:48, Kaveh Goudarzi wrote: > Hi, > > I had a similar question ... is the endian-ness of the encoded > speex file, system dependent? or is it always little endian? If it's > always little endian (like the header seems to be) then big endian > machines (or java) will need to map everything to bigendian before > decoding ... > I have spent some

Thank you, I really appreciate the help. -Mike >>> Jean-Marc Valin <jean-marc.valin@usherbrooke.ca> 08/07/07 8:34 AM >>> Michael Jacobson a ?crit : > I'm glad to hear that my data size can be shrunk considerably, > however I do not know the minimum values that I would set the static > arrays to be. I hate to be a bother but could you tell me the >

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

This must have been an enormous pain to track down. The manual alloc routine in the TI directory (user_misc.h) clears the allocated memory, but maybe you have changed this. >> it will just start filling data in, which it shouldn't. I see that >> innov_save is set at the beginning of a for loop at: >> for (sub=0;sub<st->nbSubframes;sub++) >> { > ...

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

I'm glad to hear that my data size can be shrunk considerably, however I do not know the minimum values that I would set the static arrays to be. I hate to be a bother but could you tell me the minimum values for these arrays/structures in the state structure? Thanks! encode: stack winBuf excBuf swBuf lagWindow old_lsp old_qlsp mem_sp mem_sw mem_sw_whole mem_exc mem_exc2 pi_gain pitch

From: Jim Crichton [mailto:jim.crichton@comcast.net] Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2007 10:47 PM > >For TI DSPs, I used a private memory array rather than the C stack, and a >debug patch in stack_alloc.h to measure the scratch usage: > >#if 1 >extern char *spxGlobalScratchFree; >#define ALLOC(var, size, type) (var = PUSH(stack, size, type),

> -----Message d'origine----- > De : Jean-Marc Valin [mailto:jean-marc.valin at usherbrooke.ca] > Envoy? : dimanche, 14. juin 2009 20:46 > ? : Stephane Lesage > Cc : speex-dev at xiph.org > Objet : Re: [Speex-dev] Resampler saturation > > Just to make sure I understand, the two patches you sent are > two different ways to fix the problem, with the only >

Joost Schuur wrote: > My primary concern is the use of the word 'unstable' on the current > download page for 1.2b2. One of our major devloper partners in > particular saw that reference and opted to use 1.0.5 on their PS3 title, > which is why we based our work for them on 1.0.5. The kind of commercial > game developers that are our customers aren't going to have the

Joost Schuur wrote: > Saad has been keeping me in the loop on your recent discussions. > Since all of our testing has been against 1.0.5, based on that being the > last non-beta version, that's the particular scope of the task that Saad > is working on right now. I'm just saying it's useless to do any work on 1.0.5. It is inferior to the latest beta in all aspects,