On Fri, Mar 09, 2018 at 07:23:02PM +0100, Hendrik Leppkes wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 7:02 PM, Michael Niedermayer
> <mich...@niedermayer.cc> wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 09, 2018 at 11:18:38AM +0100, Tomas Härdin wrote:
> >> On 2018-03-09 01:40, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> >> >On Wed, Mar 07, 2018 at 03:30:37PM +0100, Philipp M. Scholl wrote:
> >> >> Here is the fourth version of the PCM patch with updated testcases.
> >> >>
> >> >> The blocksize of the PCM decoder is hard-coded. This creates
> >> >>unnecessary delay when reading low-rate (<100Hz) streams. This creates
> >> >>issues when multiplexing multiple streams, since other inputs are only
> >> >>opened/read after a low-rate input block was completely read.
> >> >>
> >> >> This patch decreases the blocksize for low-rate inputs, so
> >> >>approximately a block is read every 40ms. This decreases the startup
> >> >>delay when multiplexing inputs with different rates.
> >> >>
> >> >>Signed-off-by: Philipp M. Scholl <psch...@bawue.de>
> >> >>---
> >> >> libavformat/pcm.c | 16 ++++++++++++----
> >> >> tests/ref/seek/lavf-alaw | 42
> >> >> +++++++++++++++++++++---------------------
> >> >> tests/ref/seek/lavf-mulaw | 42
> >> >> +++++++++++++++++++++---------------------
> >> >> 3 files changed, 54 insertions(+), 46 deletions(-)
> >> >>
> >> >>diff --git a/libavformat/pcm.c b/libavformat/pcm.c
> >> >>index 806f91b6b..1ea15a9e8 100644
> >> >>--- a/libavformat/pcm.c
> >> >>+++ b/libavformat/pcm.c
> >> >>@@ -28,13 +28,21 @@
> >> >> int ff_pcm_read_packet(AVFormatContext *s, AVPacket *pkt)
> >> >> {
> >> >>- int ret, size;
> >> >>+ int ret, size = INT_MAX;
> >> >>+ AVCodecParameters *par = s->streams[0]->codecpar;
> >> >>- size= RAW_SAMPLES*s->streams[0]->codecpar->block_align;
> >> >>- if (size <= 0)
> >> >>+ if (par->block_align <= 0)
> >> >> return AVERROR(EINVAL);
> >> >>- ret= av_get_packet(s->pb, pkt, size);
> >> >>+ /*
> >> >>+ * Compute read size to complete a read every 40ms. Clamp to
> >> >>RAW_SAMPLES if
> >> >>+ * larger. Use power of two as readsize for I/O efficiency.
> >> >>+ */
> >> >>+ size = FFMAX(par->sample_rate/25, 1);
> >> >division is a bit slowish, and this is done per (small) packet.
> >> >Maybe a >>4 or >>5 could be used ? (this is a minor issue)
> >>
> >> It's not the 80's any more
> >
> > i do not think this comment is appropriate in a patch review.
> >
> > The goal is not to be different from fast code for the sake of
> > being different from fast code. Or?
> >
> > If a /25 is better than a >>4 or >>5 then it may make sense to
> > keep /25. But to me it seemed the value was completely arbitrary
> > so a /16 or /32 would do equally
> >
>
> Many common sample rates (ie. 22050, 44100, 88200, etc) don't evenly
> divide by 16 or 32 - they do however by 25.
> You would get oddly sized frames, which is not really advantageous.ok, that is an argument to favor /25 thx [...] -- Michael GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB What does censorship reveal? It reveals fear. -- Julian Assange
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
