----- Original Message ----- > From: "Rostislav Pehlivanov" <atomnu...@gmail.com> > To: "FFmpeg development discussions and patches" <ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org> > Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2018 4:46:02 PM > Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH v6 1/3] avcodec: add flags for packets > with top/bottom field
> On 15 May 2018 at 18:03, wm4 <nfx...@googlemail.com> wrote: > >> On Tue, 15 May 2018 17:15:05 +0100 >> Rostislav Pehlivanov <atomnu...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > On 15 May 2018 at 15:55, wm4 <nfx...@googlemail.com> wrote: >> > >> > > On Mon, 14 May 2018 18:26:35 -0400 >> > > Patrick Keroulas <patrick.kerou...@savoirfairelinux.com> wrote: >> > > >> > > > Signed-off-by: Patrick Keroulas <patrick.keroulas@ >> savoirfairelinux.com> >> > > > --- >> > > > doc/APIchanges | 3 +++ >> > > > libavcodec/avcodec.h | 8 ++++++++ >> > > > libavcodec/version.h | 4 ++-- >> > > > 3 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> > > > >> > > > diff --git a/doc/APIchanges b/doc/APIchanges >> > > > index bbefc83..d06868e 100644 >> > > > --- a/doc/APIchanges >> > > > +++ b/doc/APIchanges >> > > > @@ -15,6 +15,9 @@ libavutil: 2017-10-21 >> > > > >> > > > API changes, most recent first: >> > > > >> > > > +2018-05-xx - xxxxxxxxxx - lavc 58.20.100 - avcodec.h >> > > > + Add AV_PKT_FLAG_TOP_FIELD and AV_PKT_FLAG_BOTTOM_FIELD. >> > > > + >> > > > 2018-05-xx - xxxxxxxxxx - lavu 56.18.101 - hwcontext_cuda.h >> > > > Add AVCUDADeviceContext.stream. >> > > > >> > > > diff --git a/libavcodec/avcodec.h b/libavcodec/avcodec.h >> > > > index fb0c6fa..14811be 100644 >> > > > --- a/libavcodec/avcodec.h >> > > > +++ b/libavcodec/avcodec.h >> > > > @@ -1480,6 +1480,14 @@ typedef struct AVPacket { >> > > > */ >> > > > #define AV_PKT_FLAG_DISPOSABLE 0x0010 >> > > > >> > > > +/** >> > > > + * The packet contains a top field. >> > > > + */ >> > > > +#define AV_PKT_FLAG_TOP_FIELD 0x0020 >> > > > +/** >> > > > + * The packet contains a bottom field. >> > > > + */ >> > > > +#define AV_PKT_FLAG_BOTTOM_FIELD 0x0040 >> > > > >> > > > enum AVSideDataParamChangeFlags { >> > > > AV_SIDE_DATA_PARAM_CHANGE_CHANNEL_COUNT = 0x0001, >> > > > diff --git a/libavcodec/version.h b/libavcodec/version.h >> > > > index 3fda743..b9752ce 100644 >> > > > --- a/libavcodec/version.h >> > > > +++ b/libavcodec/version.h >> > > > @@ -28,8 +28,8 @@ >> > > > #include "libavutil/version.h" >> > > > >> > > > #define LIBAVCODEC_VERSION_MAJOR 58 >> > > > -#define LIBAVCODEC_VERSION_MINOR 19 >> > > > -#define LIBAVCODEC_VERSION_MICRO 101 >> > > > +#define LIBAVCODEC_VERSION_MINOR 20 >> > > > +#define LIBAVCODEC_VERSION_MICRO 100 >> > > > >> > > > #define LIBAVCODEC_VERSION_INT AV_VERSION_INT(LIBAVCODEC_VERSION_MAJOR, >> >> > > \ >> > > > >> > > LIBAVCODEC_VERSION_MINOR, \ >> > > >> > > So far we could avoid codec-specific packet flags, and I think it >> > > should stay this way. Maybe make it side data, something with naming >> > > specific to the bitpacked codec. Or alternatively, if this codec >> > > is 100% RTP specific and there's no such thing as standard bitpacked >> > > packets (e.g. muxed in other files etc.), add it to the packet >> > > directly. The RTP code "repacks" it already on the libavformat side >> > > anyway. >> > > _______________________________________________ >> > > ffmpeg-devel mailing list >> > > ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org >> > > http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel >> > > >> > >> > This codec isn't RTP specific, its the same as V210. There are no flags >> in >> > the bitstream, its just a sequence of packed pixels. And just like v210 >> > there's a standard for what packets need to look like (rfc4175, and >> > unfortunately it does specify the fields need to be separate), so >> packing 2 >> > fields in the muxer isn't really an option. >> >> Then why are there separate bitpacked and v210 decoders/codec_ids? >> > > Its a different type of packing. > > > >> > Side data seems a bit of an overkill for a flag. I'd say the field flags >> > are not codec specific as some raw codecs and containers can signal >> fields >> > per packet. So I don't really mind them. >> >> You want codec specific flags to accumulate in AVPacket.flags? Can't way >> until we change the flags field to int128_t. >> >> > No, but I think 2 more bits won't hurt much, especially considering pretty > much all formats supporting interlaced content split each field into a > separate packet. Recomposing a frame from fields on the demux side would make the bitpacked decoder completely useless. Can we find a consensus? How about reusing AVPictureStructure as suggested by Derek? > _______________________________________________ > ffmpeg-devel mailing list > ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org > http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel