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".

Reply via email to