Hi Christian,
I checked the height/width of the surface. I get a luma channel with
the original size. The Cb and Cr
channel with height/2 and width/2. I had tested videos with 4:2:0
chroma format. But I still get the
artifacts.
I thought that a possible reason could be that the Cb and Cr should be
first interpolated to the original
and then only we can apply the filter. So, I tried to use a temporary
buffer with original size and
writing on it. But I was still getting the artifacts. But since the
interpolation that would occur in matrix
filter would use the nearest neighbor so I tried to do it using linear
interpolation and the artifacts were
reduced but still, there were minor artifacts.
Regards,
Nayan.
On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 5:57 PM, Christian König
<christian.koe...@amd.com> wrote:
> Hi Nayan,
>
> double check the width/height of the surface and also how many you got with
> a debugger.
>
> Actually thinking more about it it could be that top/bottom fields are
> separated and so you got width&height/2 and width/2&height/4 compared to the
> video mixer.
>
> Maybe try your idea instead of caching the initialized filters with the
> different sizes.
>
> Regards,
> Christian.
>
>
> Am 18.08.2016 um 18:58 schrieb Nayan Deshmukh:
>>
>> Hi Christian,
>>
>> I tried using 3 instances of the filter with original height & width,
>> height/2 & width and height/2 and width/2.
>> I am applying the 3 filters by checking the width and height of
>> surfaces respectively.
>>
>> The chroma artifacts are still present, different from the initial
>> ones. Any suggestion for the fixup?
>> I tried debugging, but I think I am missing something.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Nayan.
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 2:59 PM, Andy Furniss <adf.li...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Christian König wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Top and Bottom field are separated in this representation.
>>>>
>>>> So you got a maximum of 3 planes multiplied by two fields.
>>>
>>>
>>> Ahh, thanks.
>>>
>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Christian.
>>>>
>>>> Am 17.08.2016 um 11:11 schrieb Andy Furniss:
>>>>>
>>>>> Nayan Deshmukh wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> 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.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Possibly a stupid question, because I don't know how this stuff works,
>>>>> but why does it loop 6 times per frame rather than 3?
>>>>>
>>>>> I mean as seen if I put a printf as below.
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> + for(i = 0; i < VL_MAX_SURFACES; ++i) {
>>>>>>>>>>> + if(sampler_views[i] != NULL && surfaces[i] != NULL) {
>>>>>
>>>>> fprintf(stderr,"ADF: i = %d\n", i);
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> + 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
