On Thu, 2014-11-20 at 11:58 +0100, David Henningsson wrote: > > On 2014-11-20 08:40, Alexander E. Patrakov wrote: > > 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 That patch has been superseded by this commit: > > > > http://cgit.freedesktop.org/pulseaudio/pulseaudio/commit/?id=ac984f59d36ef555bc5b0df9af1cd48193d0d14f > > > > > > 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. > > Well, this is a more of an "upstream default" question rather than a > "why don't you recompile speex" question, and one where it might make > sense to come up with something reasonable across the board; either by > upstreaming "fixed point by default for armhf", or by Debian to drop its > patch. > > It does not look likely to me that PulseAudio upstream and Debian would > correspond to so different machine/user scenarios so that a Debian > specific patch would make sense here. Well with the patch mentioned here, i would probably drop that patch from Debian in any case as pulse would just follow speex (which is the right thing anyway).. Which makes the upstream choice in pulse a bit moot? That said i'd still be interesting on seeing speex resampling benchmark numbers on a wider set of recentish boards. -- Sjoerd Simons <sjoerd at luon.net>
