On Mon, 8 Oct 2018 11:55:09 +0200 Hendrik Leppkes <h.lepp...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 8, 2018 at 10:40 AM Timo Rothenpieler > <t...@rothenpieler.org> wrote: > > > > > > I don't think it's YUVJ all over again, as it was the exact same bit > > layout than normal YUV, while this one is actually different. > > > > Its also the same bit layout as YUV444P16, with one piece of > additional metadata tacked on top - seems quite similar to YUVJ to me. So, this argument applies equally to P010 vs P016 doesn't it? Yet we all think P010 is a completely reasonable format to have, and in fact when I added it to cuvid/nvdec originally, I only did it as P016, and we all agreed that it should explicitly handle P010. I don't have a strong opinion on this one - I first wrote this patch as YUV444P16 as well and Timo asked for the explicit formats - but I think the consistency argument makes sense. And yes, I messed up the names. I renamed all to _MSB and have updated locally. Will repost after we're agreed on the principle. Thanks, --phil _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
