[pulseaudio-discuss] [Ubuntu-audio-dev] Preferred resampler method on armhf.

[David Henningsson]

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?

Reference:
http://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-pulseaudio/pulseaudio.git/tree/debian/patches/0002-Use-the-fixed-point-speex-resampler-on-ARM.patch

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?
>
> Luke
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-audio-dev
> Post to     : ubuntu-audio-dev at lists.launchpad.net
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-audio-dev
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>

-- 
David Henningsson, Canonical Ltd.
https://launchpad.net/~diwic