similar to: Performance checks

Displaying 20 results from an estimated 9000 matches similar to: "Performance checks"

2015 Oct 01
3
Supporting 32 bit data
Op 01-10-15 om 18:14 schreef lvqcl: > Currently libFLAC stores residual signal as 32-bit signed int. And there > are the following comments in stream_encoder.c: The residual is stored as a Golomb/Rice code. As far as I know, that is not limited to 32-bit in the format itself, only in the implementation. However, there are two residual coding methods now: rice and rice2. rice2 was added
2014 Nov 23
3
New release
I can confirm git head builds and passes /make fullcheck/ (skipping the noise part of test_streams.sh) on - armv6-linux (Raspbian), GCC 4.6 & GCC 4.8 - i686-pc-mingw32, GCC 4.8.1 - MSVC 2005 Express 32-bit (make fullcheck with MinGW) - MSVC 2013 Express 32-bit (make fullcheck with MinGW) Furthermore, I've also ran the test_streams.sh of FLAC 1.2.1 with FLAC 1.2.1 as encoder and git as
2014 Jul 02
2
Performance checks
Hi all, I thought it was a good idea to get an overview of the developments since the release of 1.3.0, so here are a few graphs. The first was compiled with GCC 4.8, the second was compiled with MSVC 2013. Both were tested on a Kubuntu 14.04 machine, with an Intel Core 2 Duo T9600 (SSE support up to "version" 4.1), the MSVC compiles were run through wine, as I don't think
2020 Jun 22
3
FLAC specification clarification
Yes, this is such a case. However, implementing this in a future encoder/decoder would break compatibility with most (likely all) existing decoders, and only in some very, very rare cases where the material is such that the encoder chooses to use negative shifts, which makes it even harder to troubleshoot. Furthermore, as this can only be used in very rare cases, there is no benefit from allowing
2014 Jul 25
5
1.21 vs 1.3 encoding speed
a. Intel 2.8 Ghz Core I7 (dual core, I7-4558U) in late 2013 Macbook Pro with Retina Display b. I compiled it the same way I compiled 1.2.1: ./configure -enable-static -disable-shared CFLAGS=" -isysroot /Developer/SDKs/MacOSX10.6.sdk -mmacosx-version-min=10.6" make Am i doing something wrong? Thanks, Scott On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 12:54 PM, lvqcl <lvqcl.mail at gmail.com>
2016 Feb 02
2
Performance tests
Op 02-02-16 om 16:54 schreef lvqcl: > BTW, 64-bit flac can benefit from 64-bit words in > bitreader/bitwriter routines. Currently it requires > --enable-64-bit-words switch in ./configure parameters. It > would be interesting to test its effect, especially on ARM. Okay, I might test that as well. I've checked performance with the brand new laptop my employer gave me, which is
2014 May 19
2
error in files after removing padding
Thanks for the help Martijn, I get the same FLAC__STREAM_DECODER_END_OF_STREAM error after doing the 2 steps you suggested. Scott On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 9:36 AM, Martijn van Beurden <mvanb1 at gmail.com>wrote: > Once more hi, > > I've tried to reproduce this issue, but I am unable to do so. Could you > try to re-encode the file with FLAC (to make sure it is not an
2013 May 26
6
Anything else for Flac 1.3.0?
On 26-05-13 14:20, Martijn van Beurden wrote: > On 26-05-13 11:33, Erik de Castro Lopo wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> In my latest commit I have updated all version strings and copyright >> dates. > > Here are two patches for the website, updating the copyright as well > and copying the changelog. I would like to propose copying the > contents of flac-website.git
2014 Jul 26
1
1.21 vs 1.3 encoding speed
Please cc: the results from dev list back here though I would run some tests on a diff platform but don't have access to my PC for a few weeks Would also be interesting to see what decoding stats you get > On Jul 25, 2014, at 7:38 AM, Scott Brown <scottcbrown at gmail.com> wrote: > > I will post to the dev list, sorry about that. > > To give an idea, though, at flac
2020 Jun 17
2
FLAC specification clarification
Hi all, When trying to better understand the way LPC exactly works, I stumbled upon something which, after some digging, was already reported and (partly) fixed: https://sourceforge.net/p/flac/bugs/424/ Apparently, the FLAC specification has a LPC shift that can be both positive and negative, but the encoder specifically makes sure that only positive shifts are encoded and the decoder only
2014 Jun 27
4
Lets work towards a new version
Martijn van Beurden wrote: > Like I reported just before the release of 1.3.0 (mail of Fri, > 05 Apr 2013 08:25:10 +0200, to be specific), compiling on > Raspbian (Debian Wheezy, GCC 4.6) returns quite some warnings of > the type -Wcast-align. > > > CC lpc_intrin_sse2.lo > > CC lpc_intrin_sse41.lo > > CC md5.lo > > md5.c: In function
2014 May 19
3
error in files after removing padding
ERROR while decoding data state = FLAC__STREAM_DECODER_END_OF_STREAM It's happening with every file that I've tried now, using both 1.2.1 and 1.3.0. If a file has artwork and I remove padding, I get the above error when verifying or decompressing. If no artwork and I remove padding, the file verifies and decompresses with no issues. I'm writing tags via
2014 Nov 26
2
Changelog: improved decoding
There's an entry in the changelog: "Improved decoding efficiency of all bit depths but especially so for 24 bits (lvqcl)" A couple of comments: 1) The patch that improves encoding for all depths was proposed by Miroslav Lichvar <http://git.xiph.org/?p=flac.git;a=commit;h=4eab6313cd2198b5647d925bdb3847590505fa21> 2) "Performance checks" graph posted by Martijn van
2014 Dec 11
4
Two new CVEs against FLAC
Op 11-12-14 om 10:05 schreef Miroslav Lichvar: > but I'd rather see the real seeking bug fixed instead I think I might have a fix, but it touches quite a bit of code, so it'll take some time. I think the problem is that because bogus headers might pop up in the stream of which the CRC checks out, the whole frame is decoded to validate that a frame is correct. The bogus header
2014 Jul 25
2
1.21 vs 1.3 encoding speed
Are you sure they didn't change the default encoding level ? I would include some example timings to give a better idea of what "significantly slower" is Wonder if you see same for 44/16 files? > On Jul 25, 2014, at 2:29 AM, Martijn van Beurden <mvanb1 at gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > You might want to report this to the flac-dev mailinglist instead of the
2014 Jun 19
10
Lets work towards a new version
Hi all, It sees that the most serious bug in the flac bug tracker: https://sourceforge.net/p/flac/bugs/413/ has been fixed in git. This fix alone is worth a new release so its time to work towards one. Things I need to do for this new release: * Deal with all current patches on the mailing list. * Review all bugs reported against 1.3.0 on the sf.net. * Testing and coordination of testing
2018 Nov 14
3
New ID registration
Hi, Martijn, Thank you for reaching out, and apologies for late reply It is a dedicated metadata for volume normalization on our player. Please kindly refer to our company information here: https://labelgate.com/ application ID: SONN application name: Sony Normalizer contact e-mail address: taku.kurosawa at labelgate.com<mailto:taku.kurosawa at labelgate.com> Taku From: flac-dev
2014 Nov 13
3
free() invalid pointer
Hi, Apparently the new presets are triggering an invalid free in some code. I was running the test suite on ARM, and it gets stuck with small blocksizes. > Testing blocksize variations... > noise8m32 (--channels=1 --bps=8 -8 -p -e -l 0 --lax > --blocksize=16 ): encode...decode...compare...OK > noise8m32 (--channels=1 --bps=8 -8 -p -e -l 1 --lax > --blocksize=16 ): encode...***
2013 Sep 22
2
GCC generates slow code for IA32
I measured encoding speed of 24-bit WAV files. It turns out that 32-bit encoder made by GCC is ~1.7x times slower than 32-bit encoder made by MSVS. It seems that GCC creates inefficient code for 32bit * 32bit -> 64bit multiplication for 32-bit architecture. This problem affects FLAC__lpc_compute_residual_from_qlp_coefficients_wide() and FLAC__lpc_restore_signal_wide() functions. Is there any
2018 Dec 11
2
New ID registration
Hi Martjn, and everyone, Apologies if I have missed the reply, but I think I have not got any comment so far on this. That means our new ID request is accepted? What should I do next to proceed?? Apparently this is my first time here, so appreciate any advice assistance. Best regards, Taku From: Kurosawa, Taku Sent: Thursday, November 22, 2018 8:41 PM To: 'Martijn van Beurden'