On Sun, 5 Jul 2015 23:03:24 +0200 Michael Niedermayer <michae...@gmx.at> wrote:
> the later is not optimal when the buffer size is well known at allocation time > > This avoids a memcpy() > > about 1% faster > > Signed-off-by: Michael Niedermayer <michae...@gmx.at> > --- > libavcodec/v410enc.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/libavcodec/v410enc.c b/libavcodec/v410enc.c > index f2f7d73..5537a12 100644 > --- a/libavcodec/v410enc.c > +++ b/libavcodec/v410enc.c > @@ -50,7 +50,7 @@ static int v410_encode_frame(AVCodecContext *avctx, > AVPacket *pkt, > uint32_t val; > int i, j, ret; > > - if ((ret = ff_alloc_packet2(avctx, pkt, avctx->width * avctx->height * > 4)) < 0) > + if ((ret = ff_alloc_packet(pkt, avctx->width * avctx->height * 4)) < 0) > return ret; > dst = pkt->data; > This seems unintuitive. Shouldn't the "2" version be better and a full replacement of the original function, with the original deprecated? If not, then the naming of the function is utter misleading crap. What's the deal with this? _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
