Hi Christian,
On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 11:32 PM, Christian König
<christian.koe...@amd.com> wrote:
> Am 16.08.2016 um 19:50 schrieb Nayan Deshmukh:
>>
>> Hi Christian,
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 11:02 PM, Christian König
>> <christian.koe...@amd.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Am 16.08.2016 um 19:29 schrieb Nayan Deshmukh:
>>>>
>>>> Hi Andy,
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for testing.
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 9:14 PM, Andy Furniss <adf.li...@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Nayan Deshmukh wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Andy,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> You are right :( It messes up chroma but only in case of sharpen at
>>>>>> least for me.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Retested and denoise is also affected for me.
>>>>>
>>>>>> I tried some changes and the chroma effects are fixed if we apply the
>>>>>> sharpness
>>>>>> filter to only to the first surface instead of all the surfaces of the
>>>>>> buffer.
>>>>>> Can you verify this?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> If you mean changing surfaces[i] to surfaces[0] below, then it is
>>>>> better, but there are still artifacts/chroma errors.
>>>>>
>>>>> In addition to changing as above, changing sampler_views[0] seems
>>>>> to fix denoise and negative sharpen, but gives a new sort of
>>>>> artifact for positive sharpen.
>>>>
>>>> Sorry for the misleading language. What I meant was that the filter
>>>> should
>>>> only
>>>> be applied to first resource i.e. use only first sampler_view and
>>>> surface. As you
>>>> replaced i by 0 the filter gets applied multiple times. I tried doing
>>>> that and I am
>>>> experiencing same problems i.e. artifacts with positive sharpen.
>>>>
>>>> So can you please it try it again by replacing VL_MAX_SURFACES with 1 in
>>>> the
>>>> for loop. It should probably fix the problems.
>>>
>>>
>>> Well that would work around the problem, but not fix it.
>>>
>>> This way you only apply the filters to the luma channel and not all the
>>> other ones.
>>>
>>> The problem is possible that the chroma channels are subsampled and you
>>> don't use the correct resolution in the filters for them.
>>>
>> Yes that's it. This is what the problem is. But to resolve it we need
>> to initialize
>> the filters with different resolution. So how can this be coded. I
>> will need a bit
>> guidance on this one (as I need on most of the things :) ).
>
>
> You probably need to create multiple instance of the filters, one for the
> original video width/height, then one for width/2 and original height and
> one for width/2 and height/2.
>
> Then check the chroma format of the video buffer and apply accordingly.
>
I was thinking of checking height and width of individual surfaces and
applying the
filter accordingly, it will reduce the no. of ifs.
Regrads,
Nayan.
> Regards,
> Christian.
>
>
>>
>> I have this habit of fixing of patches with workarounds, need to change
>> this
>> approach.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Nayan.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Christian.
>>>
>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Nayan.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> + for(i = 0; i < VL_MAX_SURFACES; ++i) {
>>>>>>>>> + if(sampler_views[i] != NULL && surfaces[i] != NULL) {
>>>>>>>>> + if (vmixer->noise_reduction.filter)
>>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>>> vl_median_filter_render(vmixer->noise_reduction.filter,
>>>>>>>>> + sampler_views[i],
>>>>>>>>> surfaces[i]);
>>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>>> + if (vmixer->sharpness.filter)
>>>>>>>>> + vl_matrix_filter_render(vmixer->sharpness.filter,
>>>>>>>>> + sampler_views[i],
>>>>>>>>> surfaces[i]);
>>>>>
>>>>>
>
_______________________________________________
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
