2011/10/20 Arun Raghavan arun.ragha...@collabora.co.uk:
On Tue, 2011-10-18 at 12:10 +0200, Maarten Bosmans wrote:
2011/10/18 Wang Xingchao xingchao.w...@intel.com:
if all channels have same volume setting, use fast way to
do volume change. this patch intended to work for two formats:
2011/10/20 Arun Raghavan arun.ragha...@collabora.co.uk:
On Tue, 2011-10-18 at 17:09 -0400, Wang Xingchao wrote:
if all channels have same volume setting, use fast way to
do volume change. this patch intended to work for two formats:
s16ne/s16re.
Signed-off-by: Wang Xingchao
Hey Maarten,
I checked some code of your branch, thanks you have done so much work
in svolume part. And especially svolume-test is really very powerful
and worth for try. i decide to use it as the tool to check whether the
optimization is correct.
meanwhile, i met some compile error in branch
'Twas brillig, and Wang Xingchao at 20/10/11 08:51 did gyre and gimble:
CC libpulsecommon_UNKNOWN.UNKNOWN_la-client-conf.lo
CC libpulsecommon_UNKNOWN.UNKNOWN_la-fork-detect.lo
CC libpulsecommon_UNKNOWN.UNKNOWN_la-xmalloc.lo
CC
I've a funny feeling that this is caused by an old checkout/clone
This file was moved a long time ago, is it possible you've just not done
a make distclean for a while or were working of a 0.9.x branch previously?
hey Col,
i checkout remote branch remotes/origin/orcify after clone from :
hi,
I got not stable results, which means the optimization is not as good
as expected.
All results based on plain c volume function, not touch sse part.
All tests are for format s16ne.
Result1: channels 4, with same volume, with patch; samples 1021, loop 1000;
Result2: channels 4, with same
2011/10/19 Lu Guanqun guanqun...@intel.com:
Hi Maarten,
Thanks for your nice work, I'll take a look.
According to my test here, it seems soft volume processing doesn't cost
CPU usage too much, instead, it's the resampling that takes much CPU
usage. e.g. one sink input, resampler of
2011/10/19 Wang Xingchao wangxingchao2...@gmail.com:
hi,
I got not stable results, which means the optimization is not as good
as expected.
All results based on plain c volume function, not touch sse part.
It's good to test your optimizations. Be sure to also test with
various lengths of the
On Tue, 2011-10-18 at 17:09 -0400, Wang Xingchao wrote:
if all channels have same volume setting, use fast way to
do volume change. this patch intended to work for two formats:
s16ne/s16re.
Signed-off-by: Wang Xingchao xingchao.w...@intel.com
---
As Tanu points out, some hard data here
On Tue, 2011-10-18 at 12:10 +0200, Maarten Bosmans wrote:
2011/10/18 Wang Xingchao xingchao.w...@intel.com:
if all channels have same volume setting, use fast way to
do volume change. this patch intended to work for two formats:
s16ne/s16re.
[...]
The Orc svolume implementation currently
if all channels have same volume setting, use fast way to
do volume change. this patch intended to work for two formats:
s16ne/s16re.
Signed-off-by: Wang Xingchao xingchao.w...@intel.com
---
src/pulsecore/svolume_c.c | 70 +
1 files changed, 70
Hi all,
I didnot touch much formats optermization, only for most used
s16nr/re, please help review whether the idea is acceptable. If so, i
will take the responsbility for all formats.
--xingchao
2011/10/18 Wang Xingchao xingchao.w...@intel.com:
if all channels have same volume setting, use
On Tue, 2011-10-18 at 12:24 +0300, Wang Xingchao wrote:
Hi all,
I didnot touch much formats optermization, only for most used
s16nr/re, please help review whether the idea is acceptable. If so, i
will take the responsbility for all formats.
Have you measured the performance with and without
2011/10/18 Wang Xingchao xingchao.w...@intel.com:
if all channels have same volume setting, use fast way to
do volume change. this patch intended to work for two formats:
s16ne/s16re.
I did some work to optimize svolume already, see my branch on github:
2011/10/18 Maarten Bosmans mkbosm...@gmail.com:
2011/10/18 Wang Xingchao xingchao.w...@intel.com:
if all channels have same volume setting, use fast way to
do volume change. this patch intended to work for two formats:
s16ne/s16re.
I did some work to optimize svolume already, see my branch
On Tue, 2011-10-18 at 14:49 +0300, Wang Xingchao wrote:
Tanu, i've not done much performance test, do you have some tools for
svolume test? All suggestions are appreciated.
No, I don't know any particular tools. I was asking just because I don't
think the patches can be merged before there is
16 matches
Mail list logo
