On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 4:45 PM, John Stebbins <[email protected]>
wrote:

> On 10/30/2014 08:20 AM, Hendrik Leppkes wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 4:05 PM, John Stebbins <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> SPS_EXT can come before the PPS and results in incomplete extradata.
> >>
> > If you want this to be really complete, may also want to add SEI (6) and
> > subset SPS (15), I had some sort of crazy file where this was required to
> > get the SPS/PPS into extradata, but I lost it.
> >
> >
>
> Does it make sense to drop all these NAL checks and just add another flag
> has_pps that gets set when PPS is seen?  Or is
> this already known to cause problems?  It would be a performance hit if
> there is no PPS in the packet, but split isn't
> called often.
>
>
The whole idea is to stop working when it finds something that absolutely
means there isn't going to be any metadata anymore, like, a slice.
So the check does serve some purpose to avoid parsing through the entire
frame, just needs to be a bit more relaxed and allow a few more metadata
NALs.

Additionally to stoping parsing, it also ensures a slice isn't copied into
extradata in some crazy bitstream condition.

- Hendrik
_______________________________________________
libav-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.libav.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-devel

Reply via email to