similar to: fir_mem16,iir_mem16 and filter_mem16 optimisations

-----Original Message----- From: Jean-Marc Valin <jean-marc.valin at usherbrooke.ca> To: ??????? ??????? <altersoft at mail.ru> Date: Sat, 02 Aug 2008 07:54:34 -0400 Subject: Re: [Speex-dev] fir_mem16,iir_mem16 and filter_mem16 optimisations > > ??????? ??????? a ?crit : > > I have some questions about that functions: fir_mem16, iir_mem16 and filter_mem16. > >

Hi?Jean-Marc? Thanks for your suggestions very much! > > I am porting speex on ARM7TDMI, I have done some optimization, the > > result is that the encoder and decoder need about 60 MCPS for 5.96kbps > > bitrate and complexity 0. Can someone give me informtion about Speex > > optimization on ARM7? > > That's quite good. A few suggestions here: > 1) Don't

Hi, all, I am porting speex on ARM7TDMI, I have done some optimization, the result is that the encoder and decoder need about 60 MCPS for 5.96kbps bitrate and complexity 0. Can someone give me informtion about Speex optimization on ARM7? Another question, my ADC and DAC are 12 bits, but Speex codec is 16bits, Did someone try to modify speex to 12 bits? I think if I modify speex to 12 bits, the

Dear Sirs, I would be interested to hear your views on whether SPEEX could be made to run fast on a DSPIC33 by the following strategy: Make iir_mem16() (for example) purely 16 bit by restricting the number of bits in the signal to say 10 using SATURATE and then making the LPC co-efficients just 6 bits. At present (with standard code) the encode function is taking about 140ms which is seven

> -----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 >

> Yes, I have enabled the the current ARM4 assembly bits. I have tried > to optimize these functions(filter_mem16(),iir_mem16() and > fir_mem16()) in C code, but the effect is very small, and I am going > to do assembly optimization for these functions. Do you have another C > code about these functions for assembly optimisations? Can you give me > some information and

Jean-Marc Valin wrote on 8/20/2007 3:48 PM: > Hi Oleg, > > Turns out the problem was only triggered with DTX on. I just committed a > fix in svn/git. Let me know if it works for you now. > > Thanks again for reporting the bug. > > Jean-Marc > Thank you, problem is gone now! Oleg PS. I just finished math_approx.asm (speed optimized version for ARM). The code can be

Most asm statements clobber ASTAT bits (shifts, maxes, etc...) but do declare the register as clobbered. Same thing with CC in a few places. Some places make an attempt at clobbering some hardware loop registers, but it's very incomplete compared with how many asm statements actually use hardware loops. Signed-off-by: Mike Frysinger <vapier at gentoo.org> --- libspeex/bfin.h

Hi, I can see that there has been some effort to compile the SPEEX codec to operate on the TI c54x and c55x DSPs and I am wondering if anyone would be able to update the mailing list with their current MIPs and Memory resource requirements for their c54x and/or c55x compilation? The only estimate I was able to find in the mailing list archive was 42MIPs but I'm not sure if this is an

Hi all, I've taken preglows ARM versions of qmf_synth and iir_mem16 from rockboxes speex codec, and tweaked them a bit further for some more speed. I attach them here so you can review and take on any changes you want. Please let me know if you have questions etc. Thanks, Robin -- Robin Watts, Email: <mailto:Robin.Watts@wss.co.uk> Warm Silence Software, WWW:

Hi Jean-Marc, Based on the wonderful Speex project, I've created SpeexOutLoud, essentially a Speex codec port for Windows Mobile 2003 devices. I've included a sample project intended to show the usage of SpeexOutLoud codec in a Pocket PC application based on .NET Compact Framework. I'd request you to please go through the attached build, and include it as a contribution to the

> I am porting speex on ARM7TDMI, I have done some optimization, the > result is that the encoder and decoder need about 60 MCPS for 5.96kbps > bitrate and complexity 0. Can someone give me informtion about Speex > optimization on ARM7? That's quite good. A few suggestions here: 1) Don't use complexity 0 unless you're really desperate (the CPU gain over complexity 1 is

I have found that filter_mem2 fixed point does not match the inlined assembly version for arm4. Looking closer there appears to be an off by one error. It occurs when setting the value of mem at the end of the inner loop. In the C fixed point version this is done with a subtract. In the arm4 version instead of multiplying den by yi, it is multipled by nyi and then an add is done. This

Building svn 10958 on amd64, gcc-4.1: gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I.. -I../include -I../include -I.. -I/usr/include -O2 -fPIC -funswitch-loops -fvisibility-inlines-hidden -march=k8 -ftree-vectorize -pipe -mfpmath=sse -O3 -msse -MT filters.lo -MD -MP -MF .deps/filters.Tpo -c filters.c -fPIC -DPIC -o .libs/filters.o cc1: warning: command line option "-fvisibility-inlines-hidden" is

> One thing I've noticed so far in the filter_mem2 code is the calls to > SATURATE(x, 805306368). 805306368 is 0x30000000. I was expecting that > to be on a bit boundary, say 0x3fffffff? In which case the arithmetic > saturation logic could be used. I don't think it would make that big of a difference, since the saturation is outside of the inner loop. If it's that

The reasons I have posted these questions are: 1) To find out if Speex can take advantage of SIMD extensions. 2) To maybe learn from someone with previous experience in optimizing Speex for moderns x86 architectures before I set off trying all kinds of things on my own. See answers inline: 2009/6/15 Tom Grandgent <tom at grandgent.com> > Why haven't you tried using release build

I have a question about the overall performance of Speex and what I can do to improve it. I'm running Speex Windows x86, Visual C++ EE compiler. I will say right away that I've only compiled debug so far and used no compiler optimizations at all. I use the uwb-mode, preprocessing, denoising and echo cancellation. I've noticed that speex consumes a lot of cpu resources. When I run this

You mean the "real" (not the synthesized) residual? What is odd in your opinion? These glitches I mentioned or something else? I replaced the interpolated lpc (variable "interp_lpc") with the original lpc (variable lpc) for residual generation. This makes the situation worse, so lpc interpolation seems to "smooth" the error and reduces it. I will check the

Hi, I am using 1.2beta2 on a C5416 doing narrowband in the decode function I am having a problem with the execution of my program vectoring off to random interrupts that are not used. I have tracked down the error to the highpass function called in nb_decode -very close to the end of the function-context: it is called here: ln 1719 for me if (st->highpass_enabled) highpass(out,

Jean-Marc Valin wrote: >>I have the encoder and decoder running now and have verified that the >>encoder is bit-exact wrt to the fixed-point code running on x86 for the >>same 30-second audio sample. Encode and decode together run in >>real-time for 8KHz data, complexity=3, on 120MHz C5509 when code and >>data are all in on-chip SRAM. I have not tested the