From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from ffbox0-bg.mplayerhq.hu (ffbox0-bg.ffmpeg.org [79.124.17.100]) by master.gitmailbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C98A046A1F for ; Thu, 29 Feb 2024 00:19:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.1.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ffbox0-bg.mplayerhq.hu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 023E768CF45; Thu, 29 Feb 2024 02:19:54 +0200 (EET) Received: from iq.passwd.hu (iq.passwd.hu [217.27.212.140]) by ffbox0-bg.mplayerhq.hu (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE76B68CD00 for ; Thu, 29 Feb 2024 02:19:46 +0200 (EET) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by iq.passwd.hu (Postfix) with ESMTP id C9618EA00F for ; Thu, 29 Feb 2024 01:19:46 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at passwd.hu Received: from iq.passwd.hu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (iq.passwd.hu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 9EWM2S_5NwvY for ; Thu, 29 Feb 2024 01:19:44 +0100 (CET) Received: from iq (iq [217.27.212.140]) by iq.passwd.hu (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6E3F9EA00A for ; Thu, 29 Feb 2024 01:19:44 +0100 (CET) Date: Thu, 29 Feb 2024 01:19:44 +0100 (CET) From: Marton Balint To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches In-Reply-To: <20240228224524.GC6420@pb2> Message-ID: <98f10def-842e-d0fb-1a94-6782a7c3a366@passwd.hu> References: <20240226221940.GV6420@pb2> <20240227094810.1182-1-cus@passwd.hu> <20240227094810.1182-2-cus@passwd.hu> <20240227175430.GZ6420@pb2> <32af9267-5aec-bfe0-9740-9290a0912b48@passwd.hu> <20240228224524.GC6420@pb2> MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH 2/2] swresample/resample: rework resample_one function to work the same way as the others X-BeenThere: ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: FFmpeg development discussions and patches List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Errors-To: ffmpeg-devel-bounces@ffmpeg.org Sender: "ffmpeg-devel" Archived-At: List-Archive: List-Post: On Wed, 28 Feb 2024, Michael Niedermayer wrote: > On Tue, Feb 27, 2024 at 09:50:49PM +0100, Marton Balint wrote: >> >> >> On Tue, 27 Feb 2024, Michael Niedermayer wrote: >> >>> On Tue, Feb 27, 2024 at 10:48:10AM +0100, Marton Balint wrote: >>>> Signed-off-by: Marton Balint >>>> --- >>>> libswresample/resample.c | 29 +++++++---------------------- >>>> libswresample/resample.h | 4 ++-- >>>> libswresample/resample_template.c | 14 ++++++++++++-- >>>> 3 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-) >>> >>> what effect does this have on speed ? >> >> For the following command line >> >> time ./ffprobe -f lavfi \ >> "sine=440:r=8000:d=86400:samples_per_frame=2048,aresample=24000:filter_size=1:phase_shift=0" \ >> -show_packets >/dev/null >> >> Before the patch: >> >> real 0m3,916s >> user 0m3,812s >> sys 0m0,104s >> >> After the patch: >> >> real 0m3,597s >> user 0m3,457s >> sys 0m0,140s >> >> So it actually speed things up. > > is resample_one used in both cases ? Sure. The patch does not change the conditions when resample_one is used. Regards, Marton _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email ffmpeg-devel-request@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".