Hi,
2016-02-14 0:43 GMT+01:00 Michael Niedermayer :
> i can test and commit the code, it seems everyone who wanted to
> comment did comment
Yes, nothing really worth postponing the patchset from my side, except
maybe cleaner splitting of the bypass stuff, as agreed by the author.
I don't mind if
On Wed, Feb 03, 2016 at 12:47:47PM +, John Cox wrote:
> On Tue, 2 Feb 2016 12:52:15 +0100, you wrote:
>
> >Hi,
> >
> >as a motus operandi for this review, I have no time for a proper one,
> >or at least not fitting with John's timeframe. I'll try to close as
> >many pending discussions, and wo
On Tue, 2 Feb 2016 12:52:15 +0100, you wrote:
>Hi,
>
>as a motus operandi for this review, I have no time for a proper one,
>or at least not fitting with John's timeframe. I'll try to close as
>many pending discussions, and would prefer if someone else completed
>the review/validation/commit.
Do
Hi
On Tue, 2 Feb 2016 12:52:15 +0100, you wrote:
>Hi,
>
>as a motus operandi for this review, I have no time for a proper one,
>or at least not fitting with John's timeframe. I'll try to close as
>many pending discussions, and would prefer if someone else completed
>the review/validation/commit.
Hi,
as a motus operandi for this review, I have no time for a proper one,
or at least not fitting with John's timeframe. I'll try to close as
many pending discussions, and would prefer if someone else completed
the review/validation/commit.
2016-01-22 19:33 GMT+01:00 John Cox :
> Fair enough - th
On Sat, Jan 23, 2016 at 01:40:53AM -0300, James Almer wrote:
> On 1/21/2016 11:39 PM, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 10:45:55AM +, John Cox wrote:
> >> Hi
> >>
> >> v2 of my hevc residual patch
> >>
> >> I've fixed the fate regression
> >> I've split it into more pieces
On 1/21/2016 11:39 PM, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 10:45:55AM +, John Cox wrote:
>> Hi
>>
>> v2 of my hevc residual patch
>>
>> I've fixed the fate regression
>> I've split it into more pieces
>> Now uses ff_clz
>> Some reformating of function headers
>>
>> The patches
On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 18:52:23 +0100, you wrote:
>Hi,
>
>2016-01-21 11:45 GMT+01:00 John Cox :
>> Hi
>>
>> v2 of my hevc residual patch
>
>I'll review the bit not related to significant coeffs first, because I
>think it is the most performance-sensitive. Also there are bits that
>could be moved to o
Hi,
2016-01-21 11:45 GMT+01:00 John Cox :
> Hi
>
> v2 of my hevc residual patch
I'll review the bit not related to significant coeffs first, because I
think it is the most performance-sensitive. Also there are bits that
could be moved to other patches, at least some are related to the
later bypas
On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 14:42:27 +0100, you wrote:
> [snip]
>> >fate-hevc passes with patch 1-5, so the issue is likely in the last
>> >
>> >[...]
>>
>> Yup - bug in the arm update_rice (again - sorry). Now passes fate on
>> ARM too (now I've learnt how to run fate on my Pi in a finite time).
>>
>>
On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 12:32:00PM +, John Cox wrote:
> On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 01:57:58 +0100, you wrote:
>
> >On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 01:41:11AM +0100, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> >> On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 10:45:55AM +, John Cox wrote:
> >> > Hi
> >> >
> >> > v2 of my hevc residual patch
On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 01:57:58 +0100, you wrote:
>On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 01:41:11AM +0100, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
>> On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 10:45:55AM +, John Cox wrote:
>> > Hi
>> >
>> > v2 of my hevc residual patch
>> >
>> > I've fixed the fate regression
>> > I've split it into more p
>On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 01:41:11AM +0100, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
>> On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 10:45:55AM +, John Cox wrote:
>> > Hi
>> >
>> > v2 of my hevc residual patch
>> >
>> > I've fixed the fate regression
>> > I've split it into more pieces
>> > Now uses ff_clz
>> > Some reformating
On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 08:38:15AM +0530, Ganesh Ajjanagadde wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 8:09 AM, Michael Niedermayer
> wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 10:45:55AM +, John Cox wrote:
> >> Hi
> >>
> >> v2 of my hevc residual patch
> >>
> >> I've fixed the fate regression
> >> I've split
On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 8:09 AM, Michael Niedermayer
wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 10:45:55AM +, John Cox wrote:
>> Hi
>>
>> v2 of my hevc residual patch
>>
>> I've fixed the fate regression
>> I've split it into more pieces
>> Now uses ff_clz
>> Some reformating of function headers
>>
>> T
On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 10:45:55AM +, John Cox wrote:
> Hi
>
> v2 of my hevc residual patch
>
> I've fixed the fate regression
> I've split it into more pieces
> Now uses ff_clz
> Some reformating of function headers
>
> The patches can also be found on
> https://github.com/jc-kynesim/rpi-ff
On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 01:41:11AM +0100, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 10:45:55AM +, John Cox wrote:
> > Hi
> >
> > v2 of my hevc residual patch
> >
> > I've fixed the fate regression
> > I've split it into more pieces
> > Now uses ff_clz
> > Some reformating of functi
On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 10:45:55AM +, John Cox wrote:
> Hi
>
> v2 of my hevc residual patch
>
> I've fixed the fate regression
> I've split it into more pieces
> Now uses ff_clz
> Some reformating of function headers
>
> The patches can also be found on
> https://github.com/jc-kynesim/rpi-ff
Hi
v2 of my hevc residual patch
I've fixed the fate regression
I've split it into more pieces
Now uses ff_clz
Some reformating of function headers
The patches can also be found on
https://github.com/jc-kynesim/rpi-ffmpeg.git on branch
test/ff_hevc_cabac_4 from tag ff_hevc_cabac_4_base
Note that
19 matches
Mail list logo
