← Back to team overview

ubuntu-audio-dev team mailing list archive

Re: [pulseaudio-discuss] Preferred resampler method on armhf.


20.11.2014 12:35, David Henningsson wrote:
Crossposting to Debian and upstream lists.

Apparently Debian has a patch that uses fixed point by default on armhf,
so I'm just echoing Luke's question here: Has anybody performed any
testing or benchmarks across armhf hardware, w r t fixed point vs
floating point resampling with speex and PulseAudio?

That patch has been superseded by this commit:


So, if you prefer a fixed-point resampler on armhf (or, for that matter, on any other architecture), just compile speex with --enable-fixed-point there.

The benchmarking question is still open.


On 2014-11-18 00:25, Luke Yelavich wrote:
Hey folks.
I'm starting to work on merging Ubuntu and Debian packaging for
pulseaudio. One of the patches Debian currently has is to use fixed
point on all arm flavours they support. The argument given is that
float resampling doesn't necessarily perform better than fixed point
resampling, even on hard float capable hardware, and sometimes it is
worse. here is the blurb taken from the patch:

Switch to use the speex fixed point resampler method by default on ARM.
Traditionately there wasn't any standard floating point hardware, so for
those machines it's an obvious choise. On machine using the hardfloat
ABI floating point still isn't an obvious win over integer performance,
it's of equal performance on some machines, but slower on others.

Has anybody performed any testing or benchmarks on the hardware we
support? Should we just drop this and continue to use floating point
resampler code?


Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-audio-dev
Post to     : ubuntu-audio-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-audio-dev
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Alexander E. Patrakov

Follow ups