On Mon, Sep 03, 2018 at 10:29:13AM -0300, James Almer wrote: > On 9/3/2018 5:17 AM, Michael Niedermayer wrote: > > On Sun, Sep 02, 2018 at 09:34:23PM -0300, James Almer wrote: > >> From: Luca Barbato <lu_z...@gentoo.org> > >> > >> Merged-by: James Almer <jamr...@gmail.com> > >> --- > >> This is the next merge in the queue. It's a critical part of the AVFrame > >> API, > >> so even if FATE passes I'd rather have others look at it and test in case > >> something breaks. > >> > >> The only difference compared to the libav commit is the "32 - 1" padding > >> per > >> plane when allocating the buffer, which was only in our tree. > > > > why is the STRIDE_ALIGN (which is a thing in units of bytes along the > > horizontal axis) added to padded_height which is vertical axis ? > > This is not done prior to the change > > The only way to keep this padding we currently have in the tree applied > to the buffer allocation for each plane like it was before the change > (Except it'll now be one continuous buffer instead of one per plane) is > by passing it alongside the height parameter to > av_image_fill_pointers(). The result is essentially the same. > > Do you want me to change the name of the variable, or remove it and pass > 32 - 1 to both av_image_fill_pointers() calls directly? Removing the > padding will probably just make whatever overreads prompted its addition > to resurface. > Alternatively, i can just no-op this merge and move on.
allocating one plane instead of 3 is better obviously so i dont think this should be no-oped unless someone implements this differently i dont think the padding can be removed saftely but i might be missing something also i do not remember this 100% what i see and i may have misunderstood your reply but the code before places a few bytes between planes, the new code places a few lines, that is alot more space. Its not even the best that can be done with the current API. For example the number of extra lines would generally be 1 to provide sufficient padding at most reaslistic resolutions. also there is the independant question on the API, do we want/need to make adding padding between planes easier? actually i think that if we change from 31 bytes to X lines padding then this should be a commit seperate of the 3->1 change. This would make bisect much more meaningfull and its rather trivial to split this. [...] -- Michael GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB Does the universe only have a finite lifespan? No, its going to go on forever, its just that you wont like living in it. -- Hiranya Peiri
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
