Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Improving performance on Raspberry Pi #45

Closed
bartpeeters opened this issue Aug 5, 2018 · 6 comments
Closed

Improving performance on Raspberry Pi #45

bartpeeters opened this issue Aug 5, 2018 · 6 comments

Comments

@bartpeeters
Copy link

I've been running example-3 on my desktop which has a powerful processor and it works without hiccups.

Now I switched to running it on a raspberry pi 3 revision B, it runs semi-smoothly but I do get reports from aplay that the buffer is underrun. Looking into improving this, I've tried multiple things:

  • Add define for __THREADED_DECODING, when looking in the code I do not understand how this is supposed to do anything, this define is not used in any part of the code? It also seems to have no noticeable effect: only 1 core of the Pi is going to 100% and the other ones are doing seemingly nothing.
  • Use example-4 and then mplayer to play the AAC frames, as to take the decoding load of the dab-cmdline. When running this example, nothing gets written to stdout.
  • When looking into the qt-dab repo, you mention something about a latency option, is this option possible to use in this repo and will it improve performance?

Thanks in advance for the help.

@JvanKatwijk
Copy link
Owner

JvanKatwijk commented Aug 5, 2018 via email

@JvanKatwijk
Copy link
Owner

JvanKatwijk commented Aug 5, 2018 via email

@bartpeeters
Copy link
Author

Hi Jan,

I was running example-3 in the form of: ./dab-rtlsdr-3 -C 12A -P 'Studio Brussel' -W 20 -Q | aplay -r 48000 -f S16_LE -t raw -c 2 -D default:CARD=Amanero, which made aplay report buffer underruns.

I now tried running example-2 and everything works really good now, no interruptions and all of the cores seemed to be used:

%Cpu0 : 26.1 us, 3.7 sy, 0.0 ni, 70.2 id, 0.0 wa, 0.0 hi, 0.0 si, 0.0 st
%Cpu1 : 20.8 us, 0.0 sy, 0.0 ni, 79.2 id, 0.0 wa, 0.0 hi, 0.0 si, 0.0 st
%Cpu2 : 22.2 us, 0.6 sy, 0.0 ni, 77.2 id, 0.0 wa, 0.0 hi, 0.0 si, 0.0 st
%Cpu3 : 27.6 us, 0.3 sy, 0.0 ni, 72.1 id, 0.0 wa, 0.0 hi, 0.0 si, 0.0 st

I will rework my program now based on example-2 and hopefully the performance stays the same.

Thanks,
Bart

P.S. I don't see any pictures in your previous post.

@JvanKatwijk
Copy link
Owner

JvanKatwijk commented Aug 12, 2018 via email

@andimik
Copy link
Contributor

andimik commented Aug 12, 2018

Yes, Jan, please log in to github.com

@JvanKatwijk
Copy link
Owner

JvanKatwijk commented Aug 12, 2018 via email

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants