On Tue, 2022-08-16 at 17:32 +0100, Derek Buitenhuis wrote: > On 8/16/2022 5:21 PM, Zhao Zhili wrote: > > get_frag_time() can be called with an mp4 file which has no sidx at > > all. In that case, > > dst_st should have a higher priority than other streams, even if > > sc->has_sidx is false. > > And first_tfra_pts might be used here, which makes the check of sc- > > >has_sidx unnatural. > > So in my opinion, the check on sc->has_sidx should be removed. > > This seems like it should be in a separate patch, though - it is > changing a different > behavior than what this patch does.
OK. > > > + frag_stream_info = get_frag_stream_info(frag_index, index, > > dst_st->id); > > + timestamp = get_stream_info_time(frag_stream_info); > > + if (timestamp != AV_NOPTS_VALUE) > > + return timestamp; > > I did look at that, but I do not think it can be. > > get_stream_info_time is not equivalent to what is here. > get_stream_info_time will > eventually fall back to frag_stream_info->tfdt_dts, where as this > code falls back > to frag_stream_info->sidx_pts even if it is AV_NOPTS_VALUE. It would > be a behavior > change do use get_stream_info_time here. OK, it make sense together with `if (sc->has_sidx)`. No more comments from me. > > - Derek > _______________________________________________ > 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". _______________________________________________ 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".
