On Sat, Mar 19, 2016 at 03:06:22AM +0100, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 02:35:27PM +0000, Mark Thompson wrote:
> > On 17/03/16 14:11, Mark Thompson wrote:
> > > On 17/03/16 13:57, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> > >> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 01:48:37PM +0000, Mark Thompson wrote:
> > >>> hevc_parse.c | 10 ++++++++--
> > >>> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > >>> daf73b16f8185221a1e8112ab1928157a855fe76
> > >>> 0001-lavc-hevc-Allow-arbitrary-garbage-in-bytestream-as-l.patch
> > >>> From 725fb99402fa468e5f11f94e0ec09b2e0c91e6b2 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> > >>> From: Mark Thompson <m...@jkqxz.net>
> > >>> Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2016 13:41:02 +0000
> > >>> Subject: [PATCH] lavc/hevc: Allow arbitrary garbage in bytestream as
> > >>> long as
> > >>> at least one NAL unit is found.
> > >>>
> > >>> ---
> > >>> libavcodec/hevc_parse.c | 10 ++++++++--
> > >>> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > >>>
> > >>> diff --git a/libavcodec/hevc_parse.c b/libavcodec/hevc_parse.c
> > >>> index 63ed84a..d557cc7 100644
> > >>> --- a/libavcodec/hevc_parse.c
> > >>> +++ b/libavcodec/hevc_parse.c
> > >>> @@ -232,8 +232,14 @@ int ff_hevc_split_packet(HEVCContext *s,
> > >>> HEVCPacket *pkt, const uint8_t *buf, in
> > >>> ++buf;
> > >>> --length;
> > >>> if (length < 4) {
> > >>> - av_log(avctx, AV_LOG_ERROR, "No start code is
> > >>> found.\n");
> > >>> - return AVERROR_INVALIDDATA;
> > >>> + if (pkt->nb_nals > 0) {
> > >>> + // No more start codes: we discarded some
> > >>> irrelevant
> > >>> + // bytes at the end of the packet.
> > >>> + return 0;
> > >>
> > >> does the case of garbage still print something at some level?
> > >> if not, it should. It could be usefull for debuging to know if theres
> > >> something funky going on with NAL parsing
> > >
> > > It already doesn't print anything for the garbage it accepts between NAL
> > > units
> > > in a packet; this change just makes it consistent by silently accepting
> > > garbage
> > > at the end as well. If we want to log something for all of these cases
> > > then it
> > > would have to look more like the first version of the patch to skip
> > > zeroes and
> > > then log a warning if the second search does not find a start code
> > > immediately.
> >
> > Something like this, perhaps (not thoroughly tested).
>
> i had hoped that it was simpler> either way iam perfectly fine with the original patch that is if people prefer it ... i am not sure the debug info is worth the extra code hendrik ? [...] -- Michael GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB No human being will ever know the Truth, for even if they happen to say it by chance, they would not even known they had done so. -- Xenophanes
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
