similar to: High CPU usage

Hi Jeff, Hi Jean-Marc, I first modified the FPU control word to raise an exception whenever a denormal is used. Then I used the debugger to locate the exceptions and added VERY_SMALLs where they seem to fit well. Although I got CPU usage as low as 10%, I seriously lack knowledge of how things work inside speex. So just changing some code is not the best idea for me. My second attempt was to

Hi, I have a curious problem with speex. As long as I'm talking, it takes about 2-5% of my CPU. This seems ok. But as soon as I stop talking, CPU utilization rises to about 30-45% and stays there until I start talking again. I compiled speex from source and use it with these settings: - Preprocessor: Denoiser = ON, AGC = ON - Encoder: ABR = 15000, DTX = 1, Mode = narrowband, Rate = 8000 Hz.

Mark Schilling a ?crit : > I recompiled with FIXED_POINT and CPU utilization stays below 4%. This is a great improvement. > So how can I fix this to work with floating point ? OK, so it looks a lot like a denorm problem. The issue is basically that there are filters that decay exponentially, so when the input suddenly goes to zero, then the filter's output value becomes smaller and

>>> Linfeng Zhang <linfengz at google.com> schrieb am 06.06.2017 um 06:46 in Nachricht <CAKoqLCAfj+fDUMLfN4dLNSZ4NNAZpaSt_BWZRp+7XBqfhiSqiQ at mail.gmail.com>: > Hi Jean-Marc, > > I tried "==" before, and it failed when both results are 0.0. Maybe the > exponent or sign has difference because of the different 0.0 representation > in NEON. If anybody

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

Hi, I'm trying to use a denoiser on a wince with a FIXED_POINT defined. Denoiser works OK - it removes the noise, but then it unacceptable hurts a voice. Here is a code that I use: #define TEST_DENOISE_SAMPLES 2000 void test_denoise() { FILE *fin; FILE *fout; spx_int32_t rate=0; int chan=1; int fmt=16; int denoise_enabled = 1; SpeexPreprocessState *preprocess;

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

Jean Marc- Thanks for looking into this- I think I needed to give you a bit more info! Sorry for such a vague initial report. So most of these problems seem to be coming from the lsp_to_lpc function. In particular the following: xout1 = xin1 - 2.f*x_freq[i2] * *n1 + *n2; xout2 = xin2 - 2.f*x_freq[i2+1] * *n3 + *n4; ... in the floating point version this code can

Hi, I have a data frame where one column is a list of lists. I would like to subset the data frame based on membership of the lists in that column and be able to 'denormalise' the data frame so that a row is duplicated for each of its list elements. Example code follows: # The data is read in in this form with the c2 list values in single strings which I then split to give lists: > f1

On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 7:54 AM, David Tweed <david.tweed at arm.com> wrote: > | LLVM does not currently have special lowering handling for round(), and > I'll propose a patch to add that, but the larger question is this: should > fast-math change the tie-breaking behavior of > | rint/nearbyint/round, etc. and, if so, should we make a specific effort > to > have all

Hi Jean-Marc, I tried to add VERY_SMALL at the input of the encoder, but that did not change much. Here's a list of source code locations where denormals appear for the first time as calculation results. This list is based on a 4 minutes recording of ambient sound that is passed to speexenc 1.2rc1 with the command line --narrowband --denoise --agc --abr 15000

Hi all, What is the current preferred method for backing up ZFS data pools, preferably using free ($0.00) software, and assuming that access to individual files (a la ufsbackup/ufsrestore) is required? TIA, -- Rich Teer, SCSA, SCNA, SCSECA, OGB member CEO, My Online Home Inventory URLs: http://www.rite-group.com/rich http://www.linkedin.com/in/richteer

It wouldn''t be proper to start my first post here without congratulations and thanks to the ZFS team for such an impressive piece of work. Anyway, on to my query. I''ve been trying out ZFS, with a particular focus in reducing latency in a specific application. This application has a fair amount of random writing going on in the background (which, of course, ZFS will make

Hi, I have an application for Windows that encodes speex into a QT Movie. This all work just fine. I am porting it to Windows Mobile and read to use the FIXED_POINT define for better performance. I decided to test FIXED_POINT on Windows and noticed that with FIXED_POINT the audio was garbled where before it was fine without FIXED_POINT defined. Is there any known issues or anything I must do

Les Mikesell <lesmikesell at gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 4:04 PM, Joerg Schilling > <Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote: > >>> > >> Yes, if you mean what is described here as 'the original 4-clause' > >> license, or BSD-old: > >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BSD_licenses > > > > Do you like to

Copying a CD with k3b is no problem, except I want to include on my copy the cbbd data (from freedb.org). I've configured k3b's cddb section according to instructions at <http://www.freedb.org/en/faq.3.html#15> and read every article google could find about "k3b cddb freedb.org config", but still k3b can't manage it. Grip handles getting the cddb data just fine.

On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 2:13 PM, Joerg Schilling <Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote: > Les Mikesell <lesmikesell at gmail.com> wrote: > > There was no court case, but VERITAS published a modifed version of gtar where > additional code was added by binary only libraries from VERITAS. The FSF did > never try to discuss this is public even though everybody did

On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 5:11 PM, Erik Schnetter <schnetter at cct.lsu.edu>wrote: > On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 7:54 AM, David Tweed <david.tweed at arm.com> wrote: > >> | LLVM does not currently have special lowering handling for round(), and >> I'll propose a patch to add that, but the larger question is this: should >> fast-math change the tie-breaking

Warren Young <wyml at etr-usa.com> wrote: > On Apr 27, 2015, at 4:38 AM, Joerg Schilling <Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote: > > > > This is the SVr4 Bourne Shell, so you need to take into account what has been > > added with Svr4: > > Is there any difference between your osh and the Heirloom Bourne Shell? > >

Les Mikesell <lesmikesell at gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 2:28 PM, Joerg Schilling > <Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote: > > > > > >> > "as a whole" means generally BUT allowing for exceptions. > >> > >> OK, great. That clears it up then. > > > > Maybe this helps: > > >