Hello, On Fri, 15 Oct 2021, at 22:23, Soft Works wrote: > I really appreciate all the effort that Intel is taking to improve > ffmppeg for QSV hw acceleration, but in this case I'm not convinced > that this should be merged into ffmpeg at this time. > > [...] > In its current state, oneVPL is all about removal of features that > have existed for a long time. > > In its current state, it does not provide a single benefit over > libmfx 1.x
Indeed. But libmfx is not supported anymore by upstream, who's moving to oneVPL, aka mfx 2.0. You can think this is a bad move from Intel to remove feature, but, de facto, they don't support libmfx anymore, the new features will come only on oneVPL and the new hardware will only be supported in oneVPL. The patchset allows to support libmfx if people want, and have the old featureset. But it also allows to support oneVPL (mfx 2.0) if people want. As long as this is a user choice, I don't see why this shouldn't be merged; knowing also that upstream tells us that they only support 2.0, with less features. (This is the issue always with upgrades of external libraries, even worse when they are hardware linked) jb -- Jean-Baptiste Kempf - President +33 672 704 734 _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email ffmpeg-devel-requ...@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".
