On 5/28/2019 4:43 PM, Hendrik Leppkes wrote:
On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 9:46 AM Yan Wang <yan.w...@linux.intel.com> wrote:
On 5/28/2019 3:16 PM, Hendrik Leppkes wrote:
On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 8:57 AM Yan Wang <yan.w...@linux.intel.com> wrote:
When the format change, the VAAPI context cannot be destroyed.
Otherwise, the reference frame surface will lost.
Signed-off-by: Yan Wang <yan.w...@linux.intel.com>
---
libavcodec/decode.c | 6 ++++++
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
diff --git a/libavcodec/decode.c b/libavcodec/decode.c
index 6c31166ec2..3eda1dc42c 100644
--- a/libavcodec/decode.c
+++ b/libavcodec/decode.c
@@ -1397,7 +1397,9 @@ int ff_get_format(AVCodecContext *avctx, const enum
AVPixelFormat *fmt)
for (;;) {
// Remove the previous hwaccel, if there was one.
+#if !CONFIG_VP9_VAAPI_HWACCEL
hwaccel_uninit(avctx);
+#endif
user_choice = avctx->get_format(avctx, choices);
if (user_choice == AV_PIX_FMT_NONE) {
@@ -1479,7 +1481,11 @@ int ff_get_format(AVCodecContext *avctx, const enum
AVPixelFormat *fmt)
"missing configuration.\n", desc->name);
goto try_again;
}
+#if CONFIG_VP9_VAAPI_HWACCEL
+ if (hw_config->hwaccel && !avctx->hwaccel) {
+#else
if (hw_config->hwaccel) {
+#endif
av_log(avctx, AV_LOG_DEBUG, "Format %s requires hwaccel "
"initialisation.\n", desc->name);
err = hwaccel_init(avctx, hw_config);
--
2.17.2
This change feels just wrong. First of all, preprocessors are
absolutely the wrong way to go about this.
Sorry for this. I am new guy for ffmpeg development. What way should be
better? I can refine it.
Secondly, if the frames need to change size, or surface format, then
this absolutely needs to be called, doesn't it?
Based on VP9 spec, the frame resolution can be changed per frame. But
current
frame will need refer to previous frame still. So if destroy the VAAPI
context, it
will cause reference frame surface in VAAPI driver lost.
In fact, this patch is for the issue:
https://github.com/intel/media-driver/issues/629
its 2nd frame (128x128) will refer to the 1st frame (256x256).
This may work if the frame size decreases, but what if it increases?
Then the frame buffers in the pool are too small, and anything could
go wrong.
This won't be an easy issue to solve, and needs very careful design.
Agree. I should add [RFC] for this patch.
I can investigate frame buffer management of ffmpeg and submit new patch
for covering this situation.
Thanks for comments.
Yan Wang
- Hendrik
_______________________________________________
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".
_______________________________________________
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".
