Hardware floating point is required. So, your low-power CPU might not be the right choice - I think only the ones with "F" in the part number have hardware floating point. And don't ask anyone to rewrite the code for fixed-point unless you have a lot of money :-)
Since OpenRTX has been getting Codec2 and M17 to work in several commercial HTs, including TYT MD-UV380 and Yaesu FT2D, and this work is scalable to similar HTs from several different brands, your time might be better spent in helping that effort. See https://github.com/OpenRTX/OpenRTX and https://m17project.org/ Thanks Bruce On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 3:24 PM Josh Lloyd via Freetel-codec2 < freetel-codec2@lists.sourceforge.net> wrote: > Hi David & freetel-codec2, > > Firstly I would like to express a great appreciation for Codec 2, it's > excellent to see an open-source codec in this low bitrate space! > > I have a question about the performance of the algorithm on embedded > hardware. A collection of friends from the local amateur radio club have > got together to try build a digital radio hand-held, essentially a > walkie-talkie. This is to strengthen our understanding of digital radio, > and to practice our electronics engineering. > > I came across your algorithm when looking for free open-source codecs that > could be used with a low bitrate, and I noticed that you already had this > working on the SM1000 which runs an STM32F4. I understand that the CPU is > also computing the baseband for TX and RX, so there is some spare headroom > outside of the codec. My question is how much headroom is available, and > what clock rate do you run the SM1000 at to get the necessary performance? > > The team and I were postulating using an STM32L4 for our radio since it > offers some very low power modes which are ideal for a battery powered > device, but I am concerned that the 48MHz clock will be insufficient to run > Codec 2. I intend to have a separate controller handle the packet radio, so > that chore is lifted off the main processor. > > Can you provide any insight into how Codec 2 currently performs and at > which clock rate does it fail timing? Further, is there any reason to > suspect that using fixed point or integer multiplication may increase the > performance? > > Thanks again to all those involved with Codec 2; and for your work on the > thesis before it David, as well as the talks you've provided to the wider > community. > > Kind regards, > Josh > _______________________________________________ > Freetel-codec2 mailing list > Freetel-codec2@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freetel-codec2 > -- Bruce Perens K6BP - Board Partner, OSS Capital LLC Venture Capital - CEO, undisclosed startup
_______________________________________________ Freetel-codec2 mailing list Freetel-codec2@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freetel-codec2
