On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 09:33:03PM +0000, Rostislav Pehlivanov wrote: > On 22 February 2017 at 20:18, Damien Riegel < > damien.rie...@savoirfairelinux.com> wrote: > > > On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 03:01:05PM -0500, Damien Riegel wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 06:19:00PM +0000, Rostislav Pehlivanov wrote: > > > > > > > > > > No, do this in libavfilter and do not introduce another useless > > pseudo > > > > > codec > > > > > > > > > > > > > *libavformat, sorry > > > > > > The advantage of using a pseudo codec just to depack the stream is that > > > the input and the codec are in separate threads in ffmpeg, so it can > > > handle a heavier workload. > > > > Please find attached a v2, with the implementation in libavformat. Note > > that I don't want to send it as a patch of its own because the > > performance issue is not addressed. > > > > Basically, our test case is a raw input stream YUV 4:2:2 10 bits 1080p > > at 60fps. With the pseudo-codec, we are able to transcode it to h264 and > > dump it to a file. With unpacking done in the libavformat, the input > > thread gets too busy and can't stand the load. > > > > In the implementation you made [1] unpacking was done in libavcodec, so > > why is it not an acceptable solution for mainline? > > > > > I now think it was ok to have a custom codec format because V210 is > implemented in such a way in lavc. So I think the first version of your > patch was better. You just didn't bother to list a valid reason besides > "offload it to another thread" and I didn't think of V210 at the time. > libavformat has no support for assembly so putting the unpacking there > would be slower too. I suggest posting a v3 of the patch which is like v1 > (but please rename the codec name to something better) and which uses the > assembly for unpacking from the repository you linked.
I'll respin a v3 with codec marked as experimental and renamed to something different. Which name would suit? rfc4175? rtpvideo? For the assembly, I'd rather send it later as a separate patch, does that work for you? Thanks, -- Damien _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
