On Wed, 12 Mar 2014 09:35:02 +0100, Vittorio Giovara <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 8:28 AM, Anton Khirnov <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On Fri, 7 Mar 2014 11:56:26 +0100, Vittorio Giovara > > <[email protected]> wrote: > >> --- > >> libavcodec/h264.c | 22 +++++++++++----------- > >> libavcodec/h264.h | 2 ++ > >> libavcodec/h264_ps.c | 2 +- > >> 3 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/libavcodec/h264.c b/libavcodec/h264.c > >> index 9430aab..90b5b73 100644 > >> --- a/libavcodec/h264.c > >> +++ b/libavcodec/h264.c > >> @@ -279,7 +279,7 @@ static void release_unused_pictures(H264Context *h, > >> int remove_current) > >> int i; > >> > >> /* release non reference frames */ > >> - for (i = 0; i < MAX_PICTURE_COUNT; i++) { > >> + for (i = 0; i < H264_MAX_PICTURE_COUNT; i++) { > > > > In most of those cases, FF_ARRAY_ELEMS(h->DPB) would be even more > > appropriate > > I suppose so, but I would prefer to have that in another patchset.
Ok, if you prefer -- Anton Khirnov _______________________________________________ libav-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.libav.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-devel
