Hi,
Do we have a conclusion on whether this patch can be pushed in?
Thanks,
Ben
On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 4:25 PM, Ben Chang wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 3:10 PM, Mark Thompson wrote:
>
>> On 26/01/18 20:51, Ben Chang wrote:
>> > On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 3:32 AM, Mark Thompson wrote:
>>
On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 3:10 PM, Mark Thompson wrote:
> On 26/01/18 20:51, Ben Chang wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 3:32 AM, Mark Thompson wrote:
> >
> >> On 26/01/18 09:06, Ben Chang wrote:
> >>> Thanks for the review Mark.
> >>>
>
> To clarify, since it is less clear now with the trimmed c
On 26/01/18 20:51, Ben Chang wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 3:32 AM, Mark Thompson wrote:
>
>> On 26/01/18 09:06, Ben Chang wrote:
>>> Thanks for the review Mark.
>>>
To clarify, since it is less clear now with the trimmed context: my two
comments about this change are completely independent.
On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 3:32 AM, Mark Thompson wrote:
> On 26/01/18 09:06, Ben Chang wrote:
> > Thanks for the review Mark.
> >
> > There are some cuda kernels in the driver that may be invoked depending
> on
> > the nvenc operations specified in the commandline. My observation from
> > looking
Am 26.01.2018 um 10:06 schrieb Ben Chang:
Thanks for the review Mark.
On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 4:13 PM, Mark Thompson wrote:
diff --git a/libavcodec/nvenc.c b/libavcodec/nvenc.c
index 4a91d99..2da251b 100644
--- a/libavcodec/nvenc.c
+++ b/libavcodec/nvenc.c
@@ -420,6 +420,12 @@ static av_cold
On 26/01/18 09:06, Ben Chang wrote:
> Thanks for the review Mark.
>
> On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 4:13 PM, Mark Thompson wrote:
>>
>>> diff --git a/libavcodec/nvenc.c b/libavcodec/nvenc.c
>>> index 4a91d99..2da251b 100644
>>> --- a/libavcodec/nvenc.c
>>> +++ b/libavcodec/nvenc.c
>>> @@ -420,6 +420,12
Thanks for the review Mark.
On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 4:13 PM, Mark Thompson wrote:
>
> > diff --git a/libavcodec/nvenc.c b/libavcodec/nvenc.c
> > index 4a91d99..2da251b 100644
> > --- a/libavcodec/nvenc.c
> > +++ b/libavcodec/nvenc.c
> > @@ -420,6 +420,12 @@ static av_cold int nvenc_check_device(A
On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 7:44 AM, Ben Chang wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Please help review this patch to reduce stack frame size per GPU thread.
> The default allocation size per thread (1024 bytes) is excessive and can be
> reduced to 128 bytes based on nvidia cuda kernel compilation statistics.
> This shou
On 24/01/18 23:44, Ben Chang wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Please help review this patch to reduce stack frame size per GPU thread. The
> default allocation size per thread (1024 bytes) is excessive and can be
> reduced to 128 bytes based on nvidia cuda kernel compilation statistics. This
> should help with
Am 26.01.2018 um 00:17 schrieb Ben Chang:
Just use another provider like gmail.
Done.
Patch looks ok on first glance, will do a proper review tomorrow.
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
___
ffmpeg-devel mailing list
ffmpeg-dev
>Just use another provider like gmail.
Done.
Patch-wise, is it approved?
Thanks,
Ben
___
ffmpeg-devel mailing list
ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
2018-01-25 3:41 GMT+01:00 Ben Chang :
>> Please remove this or use another email address.
>
> Is this absolutely necessary?
Have you ever read the footer?
You are sending an email to a public email list that you
know is mirrored on the internet and claim that the
content of your email may be con
Thanks for the review Carl.
> This looks as if your commit message spans several lines, should be one line
> followed by an empty line and as many more lines as you need.
Fixed. Reattaching.
> Is there a reason why the error messages are different?
I am following the current convention of cuda e
2018-01-25 0:44 GMT+01:00 Ben Chang :
> Please help review this patch to reduce stack frame size per GPU
> thread. The default allocation size per thread (1024 bytes) is
> excessive and can be reduced to 128 bytes based on nvidia cuda
> kernel compilation statistics. This should help with reducing
14 matches
Mail list logo
