You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I am migrating a piece of signal processing code from one M0 based MCU to another, and noticed that the arm_cfft_radix2_q15 function has been deprecated in favor of the more general purpose arm_cfft_q15 with the promise of being faster.
However, bench marking between the two files, I discovered that the new function takes >3x as long as the older one. I'm running on an STM32F091RC at 48MHz. arm_cfft_q15 takes approximately 17ms, where arm_cfft_radix2_q15 takes approximately 5ms to yield the same result.
Hi cchuravy. Thank you for this valid comment. We reproduce it : the radix4 implementation is slower than the radix2 one for M0, which is not the case for all processors except M0/M3. We take your point for the next revision of the library. Regards, Laurent.
I have recreated the github issues on the new repository (sometimes merging a few related ones). You can see the link just above this comment (... mentioned this issue ...).
I am migrating a piece of signal processing code from one M0 based MCU to another, and noticed that the arm_cfft_radix2_q15 function has been deprecated in favor of the more general purpose arm_cfft_q15 with the promise of being faster.
However, bench marking between the two files, I discovered that the new function takes >3x as long as the older one. I'm running on an STM32F091RC at 48MHz. arm_cfft_q15 takes approximately 17ms, where arm_cfft_radix2_q15 takes approximately 5ms to yield the same result.
Takes ~17ms
q15_t input_buffer[1024];
arm_cfft_radix2_instance_q15 S;
arm_cfft_radix2_init_q15(&S, 512, 0, 1);
arm_cfft_radix2_q15(&S, input_buffer);
Takes ~5ms
q15_t input_buffer[1024];
arm_cfft_q15(&arm_cfft_sR_q15_len512, input_buffer, 0, 1);
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: