Chen, Wenbin:
>> Wenbin Chen:
>>> Fix: #7706. After commit 5fdcf85bbffe7451c2, vaapi encoder's performance
>>> decrease. The reason is that vaRenderPicture() and vaSyncBuffer() are
>>> called at the same time (vaRenderPicture() always followed by a
>>> vaSyncBuffer()). When we encode stream with B frames, we need buffer to
>>> reorder frames, so we can send serveral frames to HW at once to increase
>>> performance. Now I changed them to be called in a asynchronous way,
>> which
>>> will make better use of hardware. 1080p transcoding increases about 17%
>>> fps on my environment.
>>>
>>> This change fits vaSyncBuffer(), so if driver does not support
>>> vaSyncBuffer, it will keep previous operation.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Wenbin Chen <wenbin.c...@intel.com>
>>> ---
>>> libavcodec/vaapi_encode.c | 64 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
>> --
>>> libavcodec/vaapi_encode.h | 5 +++
>>> 2 files changed, 58 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/libavcodec/vaapi_encode.c b/libavcodec/vaapi_encode.c
>>> index b87b58a42b..9a3b3ba4ad 100644
>>> --- a/libavcodec/vaapi_encode.c
>>> +++ b/libavcodec/vaapi_encode.c
>>> @@ -984,8 +984,10 @@ static int
>> vaapi_encode_pick_next(AVCodecContext *avctx,
>>> if (!pic && ctx->end_of_stream) {
>>> --b_counter;
>>> pic = ctx->pic_end;
>>> - if (pic->encode_issued)
>>> + if (pic->encode_complete)
>>> return AVERROR_EOF;
>>> + else if (pic->encode_issued)
>>> + return AVERROR(EAGAIN);
>>> }
>>>
>>> if (!pic) {
>>> @@ -1210,18 +1212,45 @@ int
>> ff_vaapi_encode_receive_packet(AVCodecContext *avctx, AVPacket *pkt)
>>> return AVERROR(EAGAIN);
>>> }
>>>
>>> - pic = NULL;
>>> - err = vaapi_encode_pick_next(avctx, &pic);
>>> - if (err < 0)
>>> - return err;
>>> - av_assert0(pic);
>>> +#if VA_CHECK_VERSION(1, 9, 0)
>>> + if (ctx->has_sync_buffer_func) {
>>> + while (av_fifo_size(ctx->encode_fifo) <=
>>> + MAX_PICTURE_REFERENCES * sizeof(VAAPIEncodePicture *)) {
>>> + pic = NULL;
>>> + err = vaapi_encode_pick_next(avctx, &pic);
>>> + if (err < 0)
>>> + break;
>>> +
>>> + av_assert0(pic);
>>> + pic->encode_order = ctx->encode_order +
>>> + (av_fifo_size(ctx->encode_fifo) /
>>> sizeof(VAAPIEncodePicture *));
>>> + err = vaapi_encode_issue(avctx, pic);
>>> + if (err < 0) {
>>> + av_log(avctx, AV_LOG_ERROR, "Encode failed: %d.\n", err);
>>> + return err;
>>> + }
>>> + av_fifo_generic_write(ctx->encode_fifo, &pic, sizeof(pic),
>>> NULL);
>>> + }
>>> + if (!av_fifo_size(ctx->encode_fifo))
>>> + return err;
>>> + av_fifo_generic_read(ctx->encode_fifo, &pic, sizeof(pic), NULL);
>>> + ctx->encode_order = pic->encode_order + 1;
>>> + } else
>>> +#endif
>>> + {
>>> + pic = NULL;
>>> + err = vaapi_encode_pick_next(avctx, &pic);
>>> + if (err < 0)
>>> + return err;
>>> + av_assert0(pic);
>>>
>>> - pic->encode_order = ctx->encode_order++;
>>> + pic->encode_order = ctx->encode_order++;
>>>
>>> - err = vaapi_encode_issue(avctx, pic);
>>> - if (err < 0) {
>>> - av_log(avctx, AV_LOG_ERROR, "Encode failed: %d.\n", err);
>>> - return err;
>>> + err = vaapi_encode_issue(avctx, pic);
>>> + if (err < 0) {
>>> + av_log(avctx, AV_LOG_ERROR, "Encode failed: %d.\n", err);
>>> + return err;
>>> + }
>>> }
>>>
>>> err = vaapi_encode_output(avctx, pic, pkt);
>>> @@ -2555,6 +2584,18 @@ av_cold int
>> ff_vaapi_encode_init(AVCodecContext *avctx)
>>> }
>>> }
>>>
>>> +#if VA_CHECK_VERSION(1, 9, 0)
>>> + //check vaSyncBuffer function
>>> + vas = vaSyncBuffer(ctx->hwctx->display, 0, 0);
>>> + if (vas != VA_STATUS_ERROR_UNIMPLEMENTED) {
>>> + ctx->has_sync_buffer_func = 1;
>>> + ctx->encode_fifo = av_fifo_alloc((MAX_PICTURE_REFERENCES + 1) *
>>> + sizeof(VAAPIEncodePicture *));
>>> + if (!ctx->encode_fifo)
>>> + return AVERROR(ENOMEM);
>>> + }
>>> +#endif
>>> +
>>> return 0;
>>>
>>> fail:
>>> @@ -2592,6 +2633,7 @@ av_cold int
>> ff_vaapi_encode_close(AVCodecContext *avctx)
>>>
>>> av_freep(&ctx->codec_sequence_params);
>>> av_freep(&ctx->codec_picture_params);
>>> + av_fifo_freep(&ctx->encode_fifo);
>>
>> Is it guaranteed that the fifo is empty at this point? I don't think so.
>
> I don't check the fifo size, because in ff_vaapi_encode_close() all pics
> are already freed and encode_fifo only buffer pic.
> ```
> for (pic = ctx->pic_start; pic; pic = next) {
> next = pic->next;
> vaapi_encode_free(avctx, pic);
> }
> ```
>
Ok, seems like the FIFO does not have ownership of the pics. Alright then.
>>
>>>
>>> av_buffer_unref(&ctx->recon_frames_ref);
>>> av_buffer_unref(&ctx->input_frames_ref);
>>> diff --git a/libavcodec/vaapi_encode.h b/libavcodec/vaapi_encode.h
>>> index b41604a883..560a1c42a9 100644
>>> --- a/libavcodec/vaapi_encode.h
>>> +++ b/libavcodec/vaapi_encode.h
>>> @@ -29,6 +29,7 @@
>>>
>>> #include "libavutil/hwcontext.h"
>>> #include "libavutil/hwcontext_vaapi.h"
>>> +#include "libavutil/fifo.h"
>>>
>>> #include "avcodec.h"
>>> #include "hwconfig.h"
>>> @@ -345,6 +346,10 @@ typedef struct VAAPIEncodeContext {
>>> int roi_warned;
>>>
>>> AVFrame *frame;
>>> + //Store buffered pic
>>> + AVFifoBuffer *encode_fifo;
>>> + //Whether the driver support vaSyncBuffer
>>> + int has_sync_buffer_func;
>>> } VAAPIEncodeContext;
>>>
>>> enum {
>>>
>>
_______________________________________________
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".
