Hell, can someone please review this patch? It fixes a wrong reference frame
computation problem when using parameters such as "-level 31" instead of
"-level 3.1".
From 9f9dcb3cceebb360468fea762b01780f65764a47 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Josh Brewster
Date: Thu, 16 Apr
.
>
> - Linjie
>
> ffmpeg-devel mailing list
> ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
> https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
>
> To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email
> ffmpeg-devel-requ...@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".
Hi Linjie, thanks for the feedback.
the level simply wouldn't be present in x264_levels.
>
> I'd say yes, level_idc = 0 is possible but invalid by PARSE_X264_OPT(), which
> seems
> make no sense to calculate refs from x264_levels[] table.
>
> - Linjie
Changed to > 0, thanks.
From af09a7c3d33db90092be3
> > > I only made sure that the level was positive because its initial
> > > value was -1.
> > >
> > > > else if (x4->params.i_level_idc >= 0) {
> > > > Let me know if I need to reject 0 too. It seemed like premature
> > > > optimization
> > > > as the level simply wouldn't be present in x264_leve
sed on level
> > On 26/04/2020 12:46, Josh Brewster wrote:
> >
> > > Hi, is there anything else I need to do to have this merged?
> >
> > From a precursory look at what x264 and we're doing here your patch is
> > correct. It doesn't break from a quick te
