Feb 19, 2023, 17:54 by d...@lynne.ee: > Feb 19, 2023, 16:40 by mich...@niedermayer.cc: > >> Hi >> >> >> On Sun, Feb 19, 2023 at 01:08:02AM +0100, Lynne wrote: >> >>> >>> Feb 18, 2023, 20:03 by mich...@niedermayer.cc: >>> >>> > On Fri, Feb 17, 2023 at 04:43:50AM +0100, Lynne wrote: >>> > >>> >> This small patchset mostly rewrites Vulkan to enable using multiplane >>> >> images, >>> >> and implements video decode support. Also, many numerous bugs and issues >>> >> were fixed, as well as having quite a lot of performance improvements. >>> >> >>> >> The patchset can be viewed here as well: >>> >> https://github.com/cyanreg/FFmpeg/tree/vulkan_staging >>> >> >>> >> Patches attached. >>> >> >>> > >>> > [...] >>> > >>> > >>> >> av1dec.c | 3 +++ >>> >> avcodec.h | 5 +++++ >>> >> h264dec.c | 3 +++ >>> >> hevcdec.c | 3 +++ >>> >> vp8.c | 3 +++ >>> >> vp9.c | 3 +++ >>> >> 6 files changed, 20 insertions(+) >>> >> 122f9df511e4680d0027afae5d4f9f2f1880874e >>> >> 0065-avcodec-add-AVHWAccel.flush-callback.patch >>> >> From 93223fa95389c60c015cfcee22784a1bf0fdb05b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 >>> >> From: Lynne <d...@lynne.ee> >>> >> Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2023 03:32:56 +0100 >>> >> Subject: [PATCH 65/72] avcodec: add AVHWAccel.flush callback >>> >> >>> > >>> > this patch seems to break fate-vp8-size-change >>> > >>> >>> Thanks, philipl also reported this, fixed in my branch >>> >>> https://github.com/cyanreg/FFmpeg/tree/vulkan_staging >>> >> >> ok that works, that said >> is there consensus that i should create the release branch "now"? >> It seems no review is going on in public of these patches and we should do >> the release "soon", i am asking as i dont want to just surprise anyone with >> making the branch before giving a final call >> > > We need a few more days, folks are reviewing the patches > mainly on IRC and on github, since they're large. > Functionality is on-par with the current code, and it fixes > so much, apart from adding new features, I really don't want > anyone to use the old code. > The old code is so bad, even if this patchset is broken in > some ways, it would still be a big improvement over the old code. > > Most of the code is code I maintain, and has been tested and > partially reviewed already by two developers who know Vulkan > and GPU code in general. I'd still like to have this in 6.0, so > I think what I should ask is if there are any objections to merging > this as-is, and fixing any issues during the testing period. > > Otherwise, I'd like for 6.1 to be released no later than April. >
Obviously, if we merge it now, and big enough issues are found which we couldn't fix immediately, I'd have no problem reverting the Vulkan patches from the 6.0 branch. _______________________________________________ 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".
