Hi, On Sun, May 6, 2012 at 9:13 AM, Diego Biurrun <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 09:45:08AM -0700, Ronald S. Bultje wrote: >> On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 7:10 AM, Sean McGovern <[email protected]> wrote: >> > On 3/19/12, Ronald S. Bultje <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> On Sun, Mar 18, 2012 at 10:08 PM, Sean McGovern <[email protected]> >> >> wrote: >> >>> --- >> >>> libavcodec/pthread.c | 4 ++++ >> >>> 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) >> >>> >> >>> diff --git a/libavcodec/pthread.c b/libavcodec/pthread.c >> >>> index 2e4c6a8..4000d6b 100644 >> >>> --- a/libavcodec/pthread.c >> >>> +++ b/libavcodec/pthread.c >> >>> @@ -1011,6 +1011,10 @@ static void >> >>> validate_thread_parameters(AVCodecContext *avctx) >> >>> avctx->thread_count = 1; >> >>> avctx->active_thread_type = 0; >> >>> } >> >>> + >> >>> + if(avctx->thread_count > MAX_AUTO_THREADS) { >> >>> + av_log(avctx, AV_LOG_WARNING, "Application has requested %d >> >>> threads. Using a thread count greater than %d is not recommended.\n", >> >>> avctx->thread_count, MAX_AUTO_THREADS); >> >>> + } >> >> >> >> Why? >> > >> > I wrote this after: >> > a) running FATE with 24 threads (on a 64-way ppc64 box, no less!) and >> > observing some failures >> > b) a brief comment from Justin on IRC about -threads auto being 16 >> > "for a reason" >> > >> > Please see the comment before the definition of MAX_AUTO_THREADS in >> > that same file. >> >> Hm, so your ppc64-behaviour (fate failing) is semi-reproducible at >> threads>16? I suppose it's just a warning, so I don't mind... > > So shall I queue this?
Yeah, sorry, sort of lost track. Ronald _______________________________________________ libav-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.libav.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-devel
