[opus] [PATCH] Support for Channel Mapping 253.

Drew Allen bitllama at google.com
Thu Nov 9 00:44:54 UTC 2017


Sure, ill send that asap
On Wed, Nov 8, 2017 at 4:44 PM Jean-Marc Valin <jmvalin at jmvalin.ca> wrote:

> Hi Drew,
>
> Your ambisonics patch is already merged. Can you send a patch that
> applies to master?
>
>         Jean-Marc
>
> On 11/08/2017 07:05 PM, Drew Allen wrote:
> > Hey Jean-Marc,
> >
> > I found a bug regarding exporting the matrix that wasn't always grabbing
> > the correct values, causing incorrect mixing behavior. This patch
> > resolves that issue.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Drew
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 3:04 PM Drew Allen <bitllama at google.com
> > <mailto:bitllama at google.com>> wrote:
> >
> >     Awesome!!!! Ill think about a strategy for that soon. Glad it could
> >     finally make it in.
> >
> >     On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 3:01 PM Jean-Marc Valin <jmvalin at jmvalin.ca
> >     <mailto:jmvalin at jmvalin.ca>> wrote:
> >
> >         Hi Drew,
> >
> >         Thanks for the update. Your patch is now in master. Now, it
> would be
> >         good if you could think of a way to reduce the stack usage as we
> >         discussed.
> >
> >         Cheers,
> >
> >                 Jean-Marc
> >
> >         On 11/07/2017 04:28 PM, Drew Allen wrote:
> >         > Here's another patch. Cheers!
> >         >
> >         > On Mon, Nov 6, 2017 at 10:08 AM Drew Allen
> >         <bitllama at google.com <mailto:bitllama at google.com>
> >         > <mailto:bitllama at google.com <mailto:bitllama at google.com>>>
> wrote:
> >         >
> >         >     Ok great. I'll make those changes you suggested and get
> >         back to you
> >         >     this morning.
> >         >
> >         >     Cheers,
> >         >     Drew
> >         >
> >         >
> >         >
> >         >         On 11/03/2017 02:51 PM, Drew Allen wrote:
> >         >         > Here's another one.
> >         >         >
> >         >         > On Thu, Nov 2, 2017 at 9:54 AM Jean-Marc Valin
> >         <jmvalin at jmvalin.ca <mailto:jmvalin at jmvalin.ca>
> >         <mailto:jmvalin at jmvalin.ca <mailto:jmvalin at jmvalin.ca>>
> >         >         > <mailto:jmvalin at jmvalin.ca
> >         <mailto:jmvalin at jmvalin.ca> <mailto:jmvalin at jmvalin.ca
> >         <mailto:jmvalin at jmvalin.ca>>>> wrote:
> >         >         >
> >         >         >     Hi Drew,
> >         >         >
> >         >         >     We're getting there... Some minor comments:
> >         >         >
> >         >         >     1) The public header file should not have an
> >         >         >     #ifdef ENABLE_EXPERIMENTAL_AMBISONICS
> >         >         >     since that would require the user code to define
> it.
> >         >         >
> >         >         > Done
> >         >         >
> >         >         >     2) Why do you have #define MAPPING_MATRIX_C ?
> >         >         >
> >         >         > No idea. Fixed.
> >         >         >
> >         >         >
> >         >         >     3) Looks like MAPPING_MATRIX_MAX_SIZE is not
> >         longer useful, right?
> >         >         >
> >         >         > Yup. Removed.
> >         >         >
> >         >         >
> >         >         >     4) Even though it's not strictly necessary here,
> >         please add parentheses
> >         >         >     to the definition of MATRIX_INDEX() to avoid
> >         nasty surprises in the
> >         >         >     future (e.g. MATRIX_INDEX(...)*sizeof(foo) would
> >         be really bad).
> >         >         >
> >         >         > Done.
> >         >         >
> >         >         >
> >         >         >     Cheers,
> >         >         >
> >         >         >             Jean-Marc
> >         >         >
> >         >         >
> >         >         >     On 10/31/2017 04:10 PM, Drew Allen wrote:
> >         >         >     > Hi Jean-Marc,
> >         >         >     >
> >         >         >     > Thanks so much for your review. Attached are
> >         my comments and an
> >         >         >     updated
> >         >         >     > patch.
> >         >         >     >
> >         >         >     > On Mon, Oct 30, 2017 at 5:48 PM Jean-Marc Valin
> >         >         >     <jmvalin at jmvalin.ca <mailto:jmvalin at jmvalin.ca>
> >         <mailto:jmvalin at jmvalin.ca <mailto:jmvalin at jmvalin.ca>>
> >         >         <mailto:jmvalin at jmvalin.ca <mailto:jmvalin at jmvalin.ca>
> >         <mailto:jmvalin at jmvalin.ca <mailto:jmvalin at jmvalin.ca>>>
> >         >         >     > <mailto:jmvalin at jmvalin.ca
> >         <mailto:jmvalin at jmvalin.ca> <mailto:jmvalin at jmvalin.ca
> >         <mailto:jmvalin at jmvalin.ca>>
> >         >         <mailto:jmvalin at jmvalin.ca <mailto:jmvalin at jmvalin.ca>
> >         <mailto:jmvalin at jmvalin.ca <mailto:jmvalin at jmvalin.ca>>>>>
> wrote:
> >         >         >     >
> >         >         >     >     Hi Drew,
> >         >         >     >
> >         >         >     >     I've had some time to dig more deeply into
> >         your
> >         >         patch. Here's
> >         >         >     some more
> >         >         >     >     in-depth comments:
> >         >         >     >
> >         >         >     >     1) I note that your OpusMSEncoder struct in
> >         >         private.h adds a
> >         >         >     >     subframe_mem[] that's not in
> >         >         opus_multistream_encoder.c. I
> >         >         >     assume it's
> >         >         >     >     due to a merge problem (that field was
> >         removed some
> >         >         time ago),
> >         >         >     but can
> >         >         >     >     you confirm/fix the issue?
> >         >         >     >
> >         >         >     > Done. Yes, this is a merge conflict.
> >         >         >     >
> >         >         >     >
> >         >         >     >     2) I noticed your patch adds many
> OPUS_EXPORT
> >         >         declarations.
> >         >         >     OPUS_EXPORT
> >         >         >     >     is only meant for functions exposed to the
> >         API (and
> >         >         in the
> >         >         >     include/
> >         >         >     >     directory), but I see several of these in
> >         >         mapping_matrix.h,
> >         >         >     which I
> >         >         >     >     think is incorrect.
> >         >         >     >
> >         >         >     > Done.
> >         >         >     >
> >         >         >     >
> >         >         >     >     3)
> >         opus_projection_ambisonics_encoder_init() (which
> >         >         should be
> >         >         >     >     OPUS_EXPORT) is missing from
> opus_projection.h
> >         >         >     >
> >         >         >     > Done.
> >         >         >     >
> >         >         >     >
> >         >         >     >     4) I believe mapping_matrix_get_size()
> >         should be
> >         >         returning
> >         >         >     >     align(sizeof(MappingMatrix)) + rows * cols
> *
> >         >         sizeof(opus_int16)
> >         >         >     >     rather than:
> >         >         >     >     align(sizeof(MappingMatrix) + rows * cols *
> >         >         sizeof(opus_int16))
> >         >         >     >     to match what mapping_matrix_get_data()
> does
> >         >         >     >
> >         >         >     > Done.
> >         >         >     >
> >         >         >     >
> >         >         >     >     5) I'm not sure I understand the purpose of
> >         >         >     mapping_matrix_validate().
> >         >         >     >     Can the user really cause the matrix not
> to be
> >         >         valid? If yes,
> >         >         >     then can't
> >         >         >     >     this cause problems even earlier in the
> >         code? If
> >         >         not, then
> >         >         >     maybe an
> >         >         >     >     assertion would be better. Also, is the
> >         size of the
> >         >         matrix the
> >         >         >     only
> >         >         >     >     thing you can validate?
> >         >         >     >
> >         >         >     > Removed it. You're right, it's functionally
> >         impossible
> >         >         for the user to
> >         >         >     > create an invalid matrix with the current API.
> >         >         >     >
> >         >         >     >
> >         >         >     >     6) mapping_matrix_init() returns an error
> >         code, but
> >         >         the code
> >         >         >     that's
> >         >         >     >     calling it never checks it. Considering
> >         that it's an
> >         >         internal
> >         >         >     call, I
> >         >         >     >     would say it's probably better not to
> return
> >         >         anything, but
> >         >         >     instead to
> >         >         >     >     assert in the function.
> >         >         >     >
> >         >         >     > Done.
> >         >         >     >
> >         >         >     >
> >         >         >     >     7) Same for
> >         mapping_matrix_multiply_short() and
> >         >         >     >     mapping_matrix_multiply_float(), the
> >         return value isn't
> >         >         >     checked. So it
> >         >         >     >     should either be replaced by an asssert or
> >         (if the
> >         >         user can
> >         >         >     cause a
> >         >         >     >     failure) actually checked.
> >         >         >     >
> >         >         >     > Done.
> >         >         >     >
> >         >         >     >     8) I see there's a "gain" field in the
> >         matrix, but I
> >         >         can't see
> >         >         >     it used
> >         >         >     >     anywhere. Did I miss something?
> >         >         >     >
> >         >         >     > Gain should be pulled out by the user via
> >         >         >     > a  OPUS_PROJECTION_GET_DEMIXING_MATRIX_GAIN
> >         call and add
> >         >         it to the
> >         >         >     > overall output gain. We assume the mixing
> >         matrix gain is
> >         >         always
> >         >         >     zero and
> >         >         >     > that this only matters for the output gain
> >         from the
> >         >         demixing matrix.
> >         >         >     >
> >         >         >     >
> >         >         >     >     9) In get_streams_from_channels(), I think
> >         it'd be
> >         >         simpler to just
> >         >         >     >     replace:
> >         >         >     >     *streams = channels / 2 + (channels % 2 ==
> 1);
> >         >         >     >     with:
> >         >         >     >     *streams = (channels+1) / 2;
> >         >         >     >
> >         >         >     > Done.
> >         >         >     >
> >         >         >     >
> >         >         >     >     10) In
> >         opus_projection_ambisonics_encoder_init(),
> >         >         you to see
> >         >         >     if streams
> >         >         >     >     and coupled_streams are NULL, but unless I
> >         missed
> >         >         something I
> >         >         >     don't
> >         >         >     >     think there's any valid case where you
> >         wouldn't want
> >         >         to get those
> >         >         >     >     values. If you don't have them, then you
> >         have no way of
> >         >         >     knowing what
> >         >         >     >     mapping the encoder used, so no way of
> >         decoding.
> >         >         Instead, I
> >         >         >     would just
> >         >         >     >     return OPUS_BAD_ARG if they're NULL.
> >         >         >     >
> >         >         >     > Done.
> >         >         >     >
> >         >         >     >
> >         >         >     >     11) So one issue I just noticed is that
> >         >         >     opus_projection_encode() and
> >         >         >     >     opus_projection_encode_float() (same for
> the
> >         >         decoder) use
> >         >         >     arbitrarily
> >         >         >     >     large amounts of stack memory for "buf". In
> >         >         >     opus_multistream_encode()
> >         >         >     >     that's avoided by converting just two
> >         channels at a
> >         >         time, but
> >         >         >     here it's
> >         >         >     >     not quite clear how to do that without
> >         duplicating a
> >         >         lot of the
> >         >         >     >     multistream code. If we can't address the
> >         issue with
> >         >         this
> >         >         >     patch, the
> >         >         >     >     least would be to abort when trying to use
> >         these
> >         >         calls with
> >         >         >     >     NONTHREADSAFE_PSEUDOSTACK
> >         >         >     >
> >         >         >     > Done. Let me know if we should try designing
> >         something
> >         >         around this.
> >         >         >     >
> >         >         >     >
> >         >         >     >     12) I think opus_projection_decoder_ctl()
> >         is missing a
> >         >         >     va_end() call.
> >         >         >     >
> >         >         >     >
> >         >         >     > Done.
> >         >         >     >
> >         >         >     >
> >         >         >     >
> >         >         >     >     Cheers,
> >         >         >     >
> >         >         >     >             Jean-Marc
> >         >         >     >
> >         >         >     >
> >         >         >     >
> >         >         >     >     On 10/12/2017 05:44 PM, Drew Allen wrote:
> >         >         >     >     > thanks for all your feedback. here's the
> >         revised
> >         >         patch:
> >         >         >     >     >
> >         >         >     >     > On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 2:20 PM Timothy
> >         B. Terriberry
> >         >         >     >     <tterribe at xiph.org
> >         <mailto:tterribe at xiph.org> <mailto:tterribe at xiph.org
> >         <mailto:tterribe at xiph.org>>
> >         >         <mailto:tterribe at xiph.org <mailto:tterribe at xiph.org>
> >         <mailto:tterribe at xiph.org <mailto:tterribe at xiph.org>>>
> >         >         >     <mailto:tterribe at xiph.org
> >         <mailto:tterribe at xiph.org> <mailto:tterribe at xiph.org
> >         <mailto:tterribe at xiph.org>>
> >         >         <mailto:tterribe at xiph.org <mailto:tterribe at xiph.org>
> >         <mailto:tterribe at xiph.org <mailto:tterribe at xiph.org>>>>
> >         >         >     >     > <mailto:tterribe at xiph.org
> >         <mailto:tterribe at xiph.org>
> >         >         <mailto:tterribe at xiph.org <mailto:tterribe at xiph.org>>
> >         <mailto:tterribe at xiph.org <mailto:tterribe at xiph.org>
> >         >         <mailto:tterribe at xiph.org <mailto:tterribe at xiph.org>>>
> >         >         >     <mailto:tterribe at xiph.org
> >         <mailto:tterribe at xiph.org> <mailto:tterribe at xiph.org
> >         <mailto:tterribe at xiph.org>>
> >         >         <mailto:tterribe at xiph.org <mailto:tterribe at xiph.org>
> >         <mailto:tterribe at xiph.org <mailto:tterribe at xiph.org>>>>>> wrote:
> >         >         >     >     >
> >         >         >     >     >     Jean-Marc Valin wrote:
> >         >         >     >     >     > I think you'll want something like:
> >         >         >     >     >     >
> >         >         (opus_int16)((unsigned)demixing_matrix[2*i+1] << 8)
> >         >         >     >     >     > (though you might want to check it
> >         too)
> >         >         >     >     >
> >         >         >     >     >     FWIW, we use the construct
> >         >         >     >     >        int s = buf[2*i + 1] << 8 |
> buf[2*i];
> >         >         >     >     >        s = ((s & 0xFFFF) ^ 0x8000) -
> 0x8000;
> >         >         >     >     >
> >         >         >     >     >     to manually sign-extend the result in
> >         >         opus_compare (and also
> >         >         >     >     opus_demo).
> >         >         >     >     >     If you ultimately cast s to
> >         (opus_int16), then I'm
> >         >         >     pretty sure
> >         >         >     >     most
> >         >         >     >     >     compilers will turn the second line
> >         into a
> >         >         no-op and
> >         >         >     optimize
> >         >         >     >     it away.
> >         >         >     >     >
> >          _______________________________________________
> >         >         >     >     >     opus mailing list
> >         >         >     >     >     opus at xiph.org <mailto:opus at xiph.org>
> >         <mailto:opus at xiph.org <mailto:opus at xiph.org>>
> >         >         <mailto:opus at xiph.org <mailto:opus at xiph.org>
> >         <mailto:opus at xiph.org <mailto:opus at xiph.org>>>
> >         >         >     <mailto:opus at xiph.org <mailto:opus at xiph.org>
> >         <mailto:opus at xiph.org <mailto:opus at xiph.org>>
> >         >         <mailto:opus at xiph.org <mailto:opus at xiph.org>
> >         <mailto:opus at xiph.org <mailto:opus at xiph.org>>>>
> >         >         <mailto:opus at xiph.org <mailto:opus at xiph.org>
> >         <mailto:opus at xiph.org <mailto:opus at xiph.org>>
> >         >         >     <mailto:opus at xiph.org <mailto:opus at xiph.org>
> >         <mailto:opus at xiph.org <mailto:opus at xiph.org>>>
> >         >         >     >     <mailto:opus at xiph.org
> >         <mailto:opus at xiph.org> <mailto:opus at xiph.org <mailto:
> opus at xiph.org>>
> >         >         <mailto:opus at xiph.org <mailto:opus at xiph.org>
> >         <mailto:opus at xiph.org <mailto:opus at xiph.org>>>>>
> >         >         >     >     >
> >          http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/opus
> >         >         >     >     >
> >         >         >     >     >
> >         >         >     >     >
> >         >         >     >     >
> >         _______________________________________________
> >         >         >     >     > opus mailing list
> >         >         >     >     > opus at xiph.org <mailto:opus at xiph.org>
> >         <mailto:opus at xiph.org <mailto:opus at xiph.org>>
> >         >         <mailto:opus at xiph.org <mailto:opus at xiph.org>
> >         <mailto:opus at xiph.org <mailto:opus at xiph.org>>>
> >         >         <mailto:opus at xiph.org <mailto:opus at xiph.org>
> >         <mailto:opus at xiph.org <mailto:opus at xiph.org>>
> >         >         >     <mailto:opus at xiph.org <mailto:opus at xiph.org>
> >         <mailto:opus at xiph.org <mailto:opus at xiph.org>>>>
> >         >         >     >     >
> http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/opus
> >         >         >     >     >
> >         >         >     >
> >         >         >
> >         >
> >         >
> >
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.xiph.org/pipermail/opus/attachments/20171109/d09265bd/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the opus mailing list