6 Oct
2013
6 Oct
'13
1:34 p.m.
I want to detect INFs and NANs in my DSP graph to avoid having
them spread and cause various trouble.
Here is the straight forward way:
int i;
for (i=0;i<num_samples;i++)
if (!isfinite(samples[i])) break
if(i!=num_samples)
error();
But is this as efficient as we get it?
I'm wondering if comparing samples using for instance SIMD
instructions, for instance, could make it around 4 times faster,
Something like this:
for(i=0;i<num_samples;i++)
if(samples[i]!=samples[i]))
break;
where the samples[i]!=samples[i] test would succeed
if it was a nan or inf, since INFs and NANs don't behave normally.
I don't think this particular example works though (?),
but perhaps something similar could?
Anyone doing something like this?
6 Oct
6 Oct
3:35 p.m.
New subject: A more efficient way to detect INF and/or NAN in a block of samples
I don't think this particular example works though
(?),
but perhaps something similar could?
Guess it would work to add all elements in the array,
and see if the result is inf or nan. That operation sounds
likely to be automatically vectorized by the c compiler...
5:01 p.m.
New subject: A more efficient way to detect INF and/or NAN in a block of samples
On 10/06/2013 01:34 PM, Kjetil Matheussen wrote:
I want to detect INFs and NANs in my DSP graph to
avoid having
them spread and cause various trouble.
Here is the straight forward way:
int i;
for (i=0;i<num_samples;i++)
if (!isfinite(samples[i])) break
if(i!=num_samples)
error();
But is this as efficient as we get it?
Probably. Unless you start to dive into CPU specifics and wander off to
assembly.
I'm wondering if comparing samples using for
instance SIMD
instructions, for instance, could make it around 4 times faster,
Something like this:
for(i=0;i<num_samples;i++)
if(samples[i]!=samples[i]))
break;
where the samples[i]!=samples[i] test would succeed
You probably already know that, but be careful with this when using
optimizations with this comparison. -ffast-math may void IEEE compat.
if it was a nan or inf, since INFs and NANs don't
behave normally.
I don't think this particular example works though (?),
but perhaps something similar could?
Anyone doing something like this?
In my case it's not only about detecting, but also flushing them to
zero. Depending on what is appropriate for DSP at hand (meters.lv2) I
settled on using math.h's isnan(), !isfinite() or simply adding
something (to minus infinite).
While that's probably not optimal it is portable and architecture
independent, and I don't notice any significant DSP load caused by it.
BTW gcc does not vectorize the isnan/isfinite loop that you've posted:
"control flow in loop" (i386, gcc 4.7.2). No dice when replacing the
break statement in the loop with v |= isfinite(); either. But it
unrolls the loop at least.
Another idea: add the signal (using SSE). If one of the summands is NaN,
the result will be Nan. -- that should effectively take less CPU
(assuming that NaN is non the common case).
brainstormingly yours,
robin
9:07 p.m.
New subject: A more efficient way to detect INF and/or NAN in a block of samples
On Sun, Oct 6, 2013 at 5:01 PM, Robin Gareus <robin(a)gareus.org> wrote:
I didn't know that. Thank you.
Yeah, it would probably make a lot more sense time-vice to spend
my time making the DSP graph run on several CPUs, rather than on this
optimization.
I'm
wondering if comparing samples using for instance SIMD
instructions, for instance, could make it around 4 times faster,
Something like this:
for(i=0;i<num_samples;i++)
if(samples[i]!=samples[i]))
break;
where the samples[i]!=samples[i] test would succeed
You probably already know that, but be careful with this when using
optimizations with this comparison. -ffast-math may void IEEE compat.
if it was a
nan or inf, since INFs and NANs don't behave normally.
I don't think this particular example works though (?),
but perhaps something similar could?
Anyone doing something like this?
In my case it's not only about detecting, but also flushing them to
zero. Depending on what is appropriate for DSP at hand (meters.lv2) I
settled on using math.h's isnan(), !isfinite() or simply adding
something (to minus infinite).
While that's probably not optimal it is portable and architecture
independent, and I don't notice any significant DSP load caused by it.
BTW gcc does not vectorize the isnan/isfinite loop that you've posted:
"control flow in loop" (i386, gcc 4.7.2). No dice when replacing the
break statement in the loop with v |= isfinite(); either. But it
unrolls the loop at least.
Another idea: add the signal (using SSE). If one of the summands is NaN,
the result will be Nan. -- that should effectively take less CPU
(assuming that NaN is non the common case).
Thank you, guess there are some opportunities there.
To be honest though, I hoped that someone had some read-made
code I could use. :-)
But brainstorming further, it probably works to combine the peak finding routine
(which is run on all signals) with the nan/inf-detection:
static float RT_get_max_val(float *array, int num_elements){
float ret=0.0f;
float minus_ret = 0.0f;
for(int i=0;i<num_elements;i++){
float val = array[i];
if(val>ret){
ret=val;
minus_ret = -val;
}else if (val<minus_ret){
ret = -val;
minus_ret = val;
}
}
// NAN/INF code here:
if(!isfinite(ret))
error();
return ret;
}
9:31 p.m.
New subject: A more efficient way to detect INF and/or NAN in a block of samples
On 10/06/2013 09:07 PM, Kjetil Matheussen wrote:
But brainstorming further, it probably works to
combine the peak finding routine
(which is run on all signals) with the nan/inf-detection:
+1
BTW compile with -ftree-vectorizer-verbose=7 to check what gcc does.
If you're looking for something ready-made, there are SSE, and altivec
asm routines for mixing buffers and calculating the peak value in
ardour. Have a look at libs/ardour/*.s, libs/ardour/mix.cc and
libs/ardour/ardour/mix.h
GPL and everything, thanks to Sampo IIRC.
ciao,
robin
8 Oct
8 Oct
1:30 p.m.
New subject: A more efficient way to detect INF and/or NAN in a block of samples
On Sun, Oct 6, 2013 at 9:31 PM, Robin Gareus <robin(a)gareus.org> wrote:
On 10/06/2013 09:07 PM, Kjetil Matheussen wrote:
Thanks robin, those functions are nice.
But brainstorming further, it probably works to
combine the peak finding routine
(which is run on all signals) with the nan/inf-detection:
+1
BTW compile with -ftree-vectorizer-verbose=7 to check what gcc does.
If you're looking for something ready-made, there are SSE, and altivec
asm routines for mixing buffers and calculating the peak value in
ardour. Have a look at libs/ardour/*.s, libs/ardour/mix.cc and
libs/ardour/ardour/mix.h
GPL and everything, thanks to Sampo IIRC.
4018
days inactive
4020
days old
linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
5 comments
2 participants
participants (2)
-
Kjetil Matheussen -
Robin Gareus