OsmoBTS -> libosmogsm code migration

This is merely a historical archive of years 2008-2021, before the migration to mailman3.

A maintained and still updated list archive can be found at https://lists.osmocom.org/hyperkitty/list/OpenBSC@lists.osmocom.org/.

Vadim Yanitskiy axilirator at gmail.com
Fri Oct 14 10:52:17 UTC 2016


> 1) Extend your code with encoding capabilities.

Ah, I just found it inside your repository.

With best regards,
Vadim Yanitskiy.

2016-10-14 17:40 GMT+07:00 Vadim Yanitskiy <axilirator at gmail.com>:

> Hi Tom,
>
> Thank you for explainations!
>
> > Potential Viterbi optimization using SIMD methods is substantial as I
> > demonstrated many years ago. The implementation does require
> > separation of puncturing and Viterbi. Unfortunately, the has code
> > experienced code rot since then. Admittedly, I accept much of that
> > blame.
>
> I think it would be really good to have/use your Viterbi implementation
> inside the libosmocoding. Regarding to some remarks to your code, I am
> ready to fix them (such as malloc -> talloc).
>
> Moreover, recently I had a conversation with Alexander Chemeris. He also
> mentioned your implementation, which would be better to use in embedded
> platforms (such as UmSITE) due to performance reasons.
>
> > In summary, my concern is about the implementation and not the API.
> > Perhaps we could pull the puncturing into the library as Max suggests.
> > Then, separately, consider performance changes to the internal
> > puncturing and Viterbi implementations.
>
> So, my suggestion is to:
>
> 1) Extend your code with encoding capabilities.
> 2) Merge Viterbi transcoder with the libosmocoding.
> 3) Merge libosmocoding into libosmocore as a sub-library
>    or spawn a separate repository.
>
> Any opinions?
>
>
> With best regards,
> Vadim Yanitskiy.
>
> 2016-10-13 1:54 GMT+07:00 Tom Tsou <tom at tsou.cc>:
>
>> On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 10:58 AM, Max <msuraev at sysmocom.de> wrote:
>> > Is there some microbenchmark available? Perhaps we can use it to improve
>> > generated code?
>>
>> Potential Viterbi optimization using SIMD methods is substantial as I
>> demonstrated many years ago. The implementation does require
>> separation of puncturing and Viterbi. Unfortunately, the has code
>> experienced code rot since then. Admittedly, I accept much of that
>> blame.
>>
>> =================================================
>> [+] Testing: GSM TCH/AFS 6.7
>> [.] Specs: (N=4, K=5, recursive, flushed, punctured)
>> [.] Input length  : ret = 140  exp = 140 -> OK
>> [.] Output length : ret = 448  exp = 448 -> OK
>>
>> [.] Performance benchmark:
>> [..] Encoding / Decoding 800000 bursts on 8 thread(s):
>> [..] Testing base:
>> [..] Elapsed time....................... 4.320001 secs
>> [..] Rate............................... 25.925920 Mbps
>> [..] Testing SIMD:
>> [..] Elapsed time....................... 0.458272 secs
>> [..] Rate............................... 244.396341 Mbps
>> [..] Speedup............................ 9.426718
>>
>> http://lists.osmocom.org/pipermail/openbsc/2014-April/007365.html
>>
>>   -TT
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osmocom.org/pipermail/openbsc/attachments/20161014/50c80092/attachment.htm>


More information about the OpenBSC mailing list