similar to: Resampler saturation, blackfin performance

> -----Message d'origine----- > De : Jean-Marc Valin [mailto:jean-marc.valin at usherbrooke.ca] > Envoy? : lundi, 15. juin 2009 01:30 > ? : Stephane Lesage > Cc : speex-dev at xiph.org > Objet : Re: [Speex-dev] Resampler saturation, blackfin performance > > - are there buffers who could be placed in scratch memory ? > > (I don't see any speex_scratch_alloc

Hello! I'v downloaded speex lib 1.1.11.1. I am trying to port speex lib to Blackfin processor. I am using VisualDSP++ 4.0. If I am compiling source codes with using floating point everything ok. When I am compiling with FIXED_POINT defined everything's ok and code works about two times faster. But when I am defining BFIN_ASM I am getting several compiling errors in Blackfin assembler

Hi, I am using speex 1.2beta2 on a narrowband 16-bit, 8khz system that has a severe program space problem and will not fit speex in its normal operation. In an attempt to shrink speex I placed a breakpoint in every function and ran a decode and encode and removed the breakpoints that I hit. in the functions that had a breakpoint that I didn't hit I commented out those functions (as well as

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

Hi there, here is a little bug report: # ./configure --with-gnu-ld --enable-sse # make [...] vq.c:99: error: conflicting types for `vq_nbest' vq.h:44: error: previous declaration of `vq_nbest' vq.c:133: error: conflicting types for `vq_nbest_sign' vq.h:46: error: previous declaration of `vq_nbest_sign' The --enable-sse option took this bug to the surface. The header file is

for the bits init I am using speex_bits_set_bit_buffer and I don't use the write to or read from because the data is already in the buffer I am reading from and I am writing to the final buffer so I don't need to move arrays around. what part is the vocoder part of the decode? Thanks for your help! -Mike >>> Jean-Marc Valin <jean-marc.valin@usherbrooke.ca> 08/06/07

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

I'm trying to make a design decision between a TI 6416 or DM642 (fixed point) and 6713 (floating point) platform. The application is a 32 channel speech encoder. (CBR only, 8khz, 8kbps) To get a feel for the computational load, I am running 1 second (50 frames) of voice through the encoder. My profile of the 6416 indicates I'm at 27.4M cycles/channel. I need to get below 720Mhz/32

I have a patch for libspeex, which optimises some of the loops in vq_nbest and vq_nbest_sign that speeds up encoding - my results: test file: 10s wav file at 16000 Hz, mono encoding with wideband --quality 3, --comp 3 machine: PIII-900Mhz, 256MB RAM before: 2.78s after: 2.38s I'm still trying to grasp the code (I'm just a coder, no background in sound processing), and just optimised

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

> Quoting Stephane Lesage <stephane.lesage at ateis-international.com>: > > Is this a bug ? Is it possible to fix it ? > > (I use version speex 1.2beta2, because newer versions just > don't work > > on my > > platform) > > This is probable the cause. 1.2beta2 was the first release to > include the resampler and it had many bugs. I suggest trying

Hi Jean-Marc, I use the resampler to convert various sampling frequencies to 48 kHz on my Blackfin platform (fixed-point) 48K -> 16K speex -> 48K chain does not sound very good compared to plain 16K. But the main issue is when processing loud signals, I have truncation (and not clipping/saturation) I could hear it and see it with various music and speech messages. See example.png. I also

Hi, when I compile with FIXED_DEBUG enabled, I get an error -- both when make tries to build testenc.o and when I try to link my app against the speex lib: lorenz@panelmaker:~/Blackfin/tests/speex_loopthrough$ make bfin-uclinux-gcc -c -g -I/home/lorenz/include -o main.o main.c bfin-uclinux-gcc -gl -elf2flt -L/home/lorenz/lib -o speex_through main.o -lspeex_debug -lspeexdsp -lm

Frank Lorenz a ?crit : > And yes, the same "overflow" happens even when I disable Blackfin ASM > optimizations. Indeed, that shouldn't happen. Just to make sure I understand, so far there's two problems: 1) DIV32_16() in Blackfin assembly causes problems 2) The resampler overflows When you fix/workaround those two, is the encoder/decoder working correctly or are there

Hi Jean-Marc, didn't get a reply to my last post (see below) -- do you have no idea what happens here? After some more tests, I disabled the DIV32_16 Blackfin optimizations and now get good quality on the Blackfin. But when I have overdrive on the input, things become very bad -- I'm not sure if this is really a filter stability issue like I wrote some weeks ago. I use the speex

Hi, I just started to examine the DIV32_16 function (Blackfin ASM version), and wondered why the return value of the function inside 'fixed_bfin.h' is of type 'spx_word16_t', but the local variable 'res' which is returned by this function is of type 'spx_word32_t'. Is this a trick of optimization or a bug? (Same question for PDIV32_16 and MAX16, too!) best

Hi Jean-Marc, after some problems with getting svn to work here I finally made it. Problem is, you write that I cannot use libspeex and libspeexdsp at the same time now -- because I use a "live" system (mic-in -> speex_enc -> speex_dec -> headphone out) and I can run the AD1836 audio codec on 48 kHz only, I cannot use my program now (because I use speex resampling...) So I

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:

Kemal, It sounds like you are doing something wrong. I strongly recommend that you profile your application to see exactly where the CPU time is being spent. AMD happens to have a nice profiler called CodeAnalyst that they give away for free. And it's plenty usable on Intel CPUs as well. http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/DevelopWithAMD/0,,30_2252_3604,00.html Make sure you test a