Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Adding FATE tests for FFV1 - revisited

2015-09-01 Thread Peter B.
On 08/30/2015 09:32 PM, Michael Niedermayer wrote: > probably, send patches > and probably better few and small ones at once then wait and see > in which direction reviewes go before spending too much time in some > specific direction For starters, I'd like to extract the FATE tests for FFV1 to it

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Adding FATE tests for FFV1 - revisited

2015-08-31 Thread Peter B.
On 08/31/2015 01:44 PM, Tobias Rapp wrote: > On 30.08.2015 21:32, Michael Niedermayer wrote: >>> - Target "fate-vsynth%-*" tests default to sws_flags >>> "accurate_rnd+bitexact". FFV1.3 tests have "neighbor+bitexact". Why? >> >> it makes more cases lossless IIRC >> the default upscaling + defa

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Adding FATE tests for FFV1 - revisited

2015-08-31 Thread Tobias Rapp
On 30.08.2015 21:32, Michael Niedermayer wrote: On Sun, Aug 30, 2015 at 07:06:44PM +0200, Peter B. wrote: Hello, I've been working on FATE tests for FFV1 in the past already [1]. My tests didn't work on all platforms and therefore never made it upstream. I think it's better if I try to provide

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Adding FATE tests for FFV1 - revisited

2015-08-30 Thread Peter B.
On 08/30/2015 09:32 PM, Michael Niedermayer wrote: >> - Target "fate-vsynth%-*" tests default to sws_flags >> "accurate_rnd+bitexact". FFV1.3 tests have "neighbor+bitexact". Why? > it makes more cases lossless IIRC > the default upscaling + default downscaling is not binary identical Roger tha

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Adding FATE tests for FFV1 - revisited

2015-08-30 Thread Michael Niedermayer
On Sun, Aug 30, 2015 at 07:06:44PM +0200, Peter B. wrote: > Hello, > > I've been working on FATE tests for FFV1 in the past already [1]. My > tests didn't work on all platforms and therefore never made it upstream. > I think it's better if I try to provide these new tests in smaller > chunks now :

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Adding FATE tests for FFV1 - revisited

2015-08-30 Thread Peter B.
On 08/30/2015 07:33 PM, Paul B Mahol wrote: > On 8/30/15, Peter B. wrote: >> This will produce quite a number of tests :( >> I guess it is desired to keep the number of tests as low as necessary? > Not at all. Just look at ffv1 coverage at coverage.ffmpeg.org :) I'd love to add tests for FFV1 to

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Adding FATE tests for FFV1 - revisited

2015-08-30 Thread Paul B Mahol
On 8/30/15, Peter B. wrote: > Hello, > > I've been working on FATE tests for FFV1 in the past already [1]. My > tests didn't work on all platforms and therefore never made it upstream. > I think it's better if I try to provide these new tests in smaller > chunks now :) > > > First of all, there ar

[FFmpeg-devel] Adding FATE tests for FFV1 - revisited

2015-08-30 Thread Peter B.
Hello, I've been working on FATE tests for FFV1 in the past already [1]. My tests didn't work on all platforms and therefore never made it upstream. I think it's better if I try to provide these new tests in smaller chunks now :) First of all, there are things I find inconsistent or confusing wi