Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] avfillter/buffersrc: activate and EOF fix
Paul B Mahol (12023-11-03): > Also I think that forward and/or backward EOF direction status checking is > not correctly handled at all for any filters not using .activate(), and I'm > not aware that it was ever working correctly in all cases. Could you not start with that?!? If you are right, that means there is a bug in the framework code. Then the patch forward is to fix that bug, not needlessly single every simple filter to activate. -- Nicolas George signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ 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".
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] avfillter/buffersrc: activate and EOF fix
On Fri, Nov 3, 2023 at 8:04 PM Nicolas George wrote: > Tristan Matthews (12023-11-02): > > Just to confirm that I can reproduce JEEB's test, before the patches: > > Just to be clear: I never doubted that Paul's patches do make the bug go > away in your test case. That would imply accusing Paul of lying about > simple technical facts, that would be both stupid and uncivil. > > What you need to understand is that is barely relevant: “I churned the > code a lot and now the bug does not happen in my test case” is not an > acceptable way of leading development. > > What Paul needs to provide (or you, or anybody else; no idea who “JEEB” > is) is a proof that the changes are both correct and necessary. > > Correct: you need to prove that this bug is fixed in all cases, not just > the one you were testing on. > > Necessary: you need to establish that the bug cannot be fixed with fewer > changes, because each change is chance for introducing a new bug. > > Such a proof would certainly start with with an analysis of how the bug > gets triggered by the current code. > > The “necessary” point is especially important: it is a well-established > principle that filters with no more than one input and one output do not > need to use the activate framework directly (and therefore should not, > as it makes the code more complex). > > If Paul thinks he found an exception to that well-established law, he > needs to present strong evidence. > > But if no such exception exist (which is the most likely: the law is > true), then it is entirely possible that what Paul found is a bug in the > code that implements the activate mechanism for simple filters. And in > that case, we need to fix that bug. > > Or maybe the actual problem is somewhere in the fftools an error check > is skipped. > > We need to know what is happening before any fix can be devised. We need > an analysis of the bug. Any effort going into this that is not first > analyzing what is going on is a waste of time. > What an triptych of text for such simple concepts, Homer and Tolstoy would be embarrassed. Introduction of .activate API introduced checking for explicit EOF from both direction in filter processing, the next filter in filtergraph, and for filter previous of current filter in filtergraph. buffersrc filter patch for switching to activate adds explicit code to check for EOF reached in forward (relative to buffersrc filter) direction of filtergraph processing. I'm not aware that buffersrc ever checked for such cases even in era before .activate API was introduced. By simply adding printf into buffersrc filter code or adding showinfo filter between buffersrc and next filter (relative from buffersrc filter) one can find out that buffersrc ignores EOF and keeps pushing frames to next filters in filtergraph that reached EOF status. Also I think that forward and/or backward EOF direction status checking is not correctly handled at all for any filters not using .activate(), and I'm not aware that it was ever working correctly in all cases. > > Regards, > > -- > Nicolas George > ___ > 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".
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] avfillter/buffersrc: activate and EOF fix
Tristan Matthews (12023-11-02): > Just to confirm that I can reproduce JEEB's test, before the patches: Just to be clear: I never doubted that Paul's patches do make the bug go away in your test case. That would imply accusing Paul of lying about simple technical facts, that would be both stupid and uncivil. What you need to understand is that is barely relevant: “I churned the code a lot and now the bug does not happen in my test case” is not an acceptable way of leading development. What Paul needs to provide (or you, or anybody else; no idea who “JEEB” is) is a proof that the changes are both correct and necessary. Correct: you need to prove that this bug is fixed in all cases, not just the one you were testing on. Necessary: you need to establish that the bug cannot be fixed with fewer changes, because each change is chance for introducing a new bug. Such a proof would certainly start with with an analysis of how the bug gets triggered by the current code. The “necessary” point is especially important: it is a well-established principle that filters with no more than one input and one output do not need to use the activate framework directly (and therefore should not, as it makes the code more complex). If Paul thinks he found an exception to that well-established law, he needs to present strong evidence. But if no such exception exist (which is the most likely: the law is true), then it is entirely possible that what Paul found is a bug in the code that implements the activate mechanism for simple filters. And in that case, we need to fix that bug. Or maybe the actual problem is somewhere in the fftools an error check is skipped. We need to know what is happening before any fix can be devised. We need an analysis of the bug. Any effort going into this that is not first analyzing what is going on is a waste of time. Regards, -- Nicolas George signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ 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".
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] avfillter/buffersrc: activate and EOF fix
On Thu, Nov 2, 2023 at 6:10 AM Paul B Mahol wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 2, 2023 at 11:03 AM Nicolas George wrote: > > > Paul B Mahol (12023-11-02): > > > I analyzed it already, It is very sorry state of libavfilter that > > buffersrc > > > keeps sending frames to EOF filtergraph. > > > > So, Paul, I will explain this to you one last time. > > > > Remember high school, when you had math test, and if you just gave the > > result you got almost no points even if the result was correct? That was > > because solving a math exercise is not just about finding the result, it > > is about showing how you reach the result and proving that the result is > > correct. > > > > The same goes here. On your own projects, you can change randomly the > > code until a bug is no longer triggered and call it fixed. > > > > But in FFmpeg, you are not alone, and when a change is not trivial you > > have to prove to your fellow developers that it is correct and > > necessary. > > > > So get to work, produce that proof, re-submit the patch with the proof > > in the commit message, and then we can talk. > > > > As it is, the need to switch buffersrc to activate is not established, > > and therefore it should not be done. > > > > I do not understand. What proof you need? > Have you even tested this JEEB script without patches applied? > It should straight forward cause OOM bomb. > > Have you noticed that buffersrc filter never checks outlink status of its > output link? > Just to confirm that I can reproduce JEEB's test, before the patches: Maximum resident set size (kbytes): 629568 with *both* patches applied: Maximum resident set size (kbytes): 80920 Best, Tristan > > > > > -- > > Nicolas George > > ___ > > 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". ___ 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".
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] avfillter/buffersrc: activate and EOF fix
Paul B Mahol (12023-11-02): > I do not understand. What proof you need? That the patch is correct and necessary. First, explain how the current triggers the problem. In the commit message. -- Nicolas George ___ 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".
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] avfillter/buffersrc: activate and EOF fix
On Thu, Nov 2, 2023 at 11:03 AM Nicolas George wrote: > Paul B Mahol (12023-11-02): > > I analyzed it already, It is very sorry state of libavfilter that > buffersrc > > keeps sending frames to EOF filtergraph. > > So, Paul, I will explain this to you one last time. > > Remember high school, when you had math test, and if you just gave the > result you got almost no points even if the result was correct? That was > because solving a math exercise is not just about finding the result, it > is about showing how you reach the result and proving that the result is > correct. > > The same goes here. On your own projects, you can change randomly the > code until a bug is no longer triggered and call it fixed. > > But in FFmpeg, you are not alone, and when a change is not trivial you > have to prove to your fellow developers that it is correct and > necessary. > > So get to work, produce that proof, re-submit the patch with the proof > in the commit message, and then we can talk. > > As it is, the need to switch buffersrc to activate is not established, > and therefore it should not be done. > I do not understand. What proof you need? Have you even tested this JEEB script without patches applied? It should straight forward cause OOM bomb. Have you noticed that buffersrc filter never checks outlink status of its output link? > > -- > Nicolas George > ___ > 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".
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] avfillter/buffersrc: activate and EOF fix
Paul B Mahol (12023-11-02): > I analyzed it already, It is very sorry state of libavfilter that buffersrc > keeps sending frames to EOF filtergraph. So, Paul, I will explain this to you one last time. Remember high school, when you had math test, and if you just gave the result you got almost no points even if the result was correct? That was because solving a math exercise is not just about finding the result, it is about showing how you reach the result and proving that the result is correct. The same goes here. On your own projects, you can change randomly the code until a bug is no longer triggered and call it fixed. But in FFmpeg, you are not alone, and when a change is not trivial you have to prove to your fellow developers that it is correct and necessary. So get to work, produce that proof, re-submit the patch with the proof in the commit message, and then we can talk. As it is, the need to switch buffersrc to activate is not established, and therefore it should not be done. -- Nicolas George ___ 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".
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] avfillter/buffersrc: activate and EOF fix
On Thu, Nov 2, 2023 at 10:50 AM Nicolas George wrote: > Paul B Mahol (12023-11-02): > > You applied both patches? At correct order? > > Duh. > There are two patches, OOM is fixed only if both are applied. > > > I probably should merge patches into single one. > > You need to analyze the bug and produce a proof that it is correct. A > change to activate is not acceptable without a proof that it is > necessary. The proof should be detailed and in the commit message. > I analyzed it already, It is very sorry state of libavfilter that buffersrc keeps sending frames to EOF filtergraph. > > -- > Nicolas George > ___ > 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".
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] avfillter/buffersrc: activate and EOF fix
Paul B Mahol (12023-11-02): > You applied both patches? At correct order? Duh. > I probably should merge patches into single one. You need to analyze the bug and produce a proof that it is correct. A change to activate is not acceptable without a proof that it is necessary. The proof should be detailed and in the commit message. -- Nicolas George ___ 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".
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] avfillter/buffersrc: activate and EOF fix
On Wed, Nov 1, 2023 at 3:13 PM Nicolas George wrote: > Paul B Mahol (12023-11-01): > > It fixes it for me, ffmpeg no longer keeps sending frames to EOF > > filtergraph. > > And no more memory is allocated and never freed. > > And that is just LUCK because you changed unrelated things. You have to > provide a PROOF, starting with what was wrong in the original code. > > > I ask you, kindly, once more time, to provide way how to trigger memory > > boom (OOM) with those patches applied. > > I just ran the test case you gave in my usual testing environment. There > is nothing I can tell you more, I can just copy-paste the result. > > Anyway, in the process of analyzing the bug and writing the proof for > your fix, you should be able to find out why it is still happening ins > subtly different circumstances. > > > ffmpeg version N-112636-g53f9d14063 Copyright (c) 2000-2023 the FFmpeg > developers > built with gcc 13 (Debian 13.2.0-5) > configuration: --enable-shared --disable-static --enable-gpl > --enable-libx264 --enable-libopus --enable-libass --enable-libfreetype > --enable-opengl --assert-level=2 > libavutil 58. 31.100 / 58. 31.100 > libavcodec 60. 32.102 / 60. 32.102 > libavformat60. 17.100 / 60. 17.100 > libavdevice60. 4.100 / 60. 4.100 > libavfilter 9. 13.100 / 9. 13.100 > libswscale 7. 6.100 / 7. 6.100 > libswresample 4. 13.100 / 4. 13.100 > libpostproc57. 4.100 / 57. 4.100 > [Parsed_scale_2 @ 0x557c9a7e6fc0] w:720 h:-2 flags:'' interl:0 > [Parsed_hqdn3d_4 @ 0x557c9a7f4640] ls:4.00 cs:3.00 lt:6.00 > ct:4.50 > [h264 @ 0x557c9a7e7e40] Reinit context to 640x480, pix_fmt: yuv420p > Input #0, mov,mp4,m4a,3gp,3g2,mj2, from '../test_clip.mp4': > Metadata: > major_brand : isom > minor_version : 512 > compatible_brands: isomiso2avc1mp41 > encoder : Lavf60.17.100 > Duration: 00:07:50.00, start: 0.00, bitrate: 1594 kb/s > Stream #0:0[0x1](und): Video: h264 (High), 1 reference frame (avc1 / > 0x31637661), yuv420p(progressive, left), 640x480 [SAR 1:1 DAR 4:3], 1592 > kb/s, 25 fps, 25 tbr, 12800 tbn (default) > Metadata: > handler_name: VideoHandler > vendor_id : [0][0][0][0] > encoder : Lavc60.32.102 libx264 > [out#0/mp4 @ 0x557c9b07e000] Adding streams from explicit maps... > [vost#0:0/copy @ 0x557c9b07f080] Created video stream from input stream 0:0 > Output #0, mp4, to '../test_clip.mp4_copy.mp4': > Metadata: > major_brand : isom > minor_version : 512 > compatible_brands: isomiso2avc1mp41 > encoder : Lavf60.17.100 > Stream #0:0(und): Video: h264 (High), 1 reference frame (avc1 / > 0x31637661), yuv420p(progressive, left), 640x480 (0x0) [SAR 1:1 DAR 4:3], > q=2-31, 1592 kb/s, 25 fps, 25 tbr, 12800 tbn (default) > Metadata: > handler_name: VideoHandler > vendor_id : [0][0][0][0] > encoder : Lavc60.32.102 libx264 > [out#1/image2 @ 0x557c9b0c1640] Adding streams from explicit maps... > [out#1/image2 @ 0x557c9b0c1640] Creating output stream from an explicitly > mapped complex filtergraph 0, output [thumb_out] > [vost#1:0/mjpeg @ 0x557c9b0c44c0] Created video stream from complex > filtergraph 0:[unsharp:default] > [vost#1:0/mjpeg @ 0x557c9b0c44c0] > Stream mapping: > Stream #0:0 (h264) -> split:default > Stream #0:0 -> #0:0 (copy) > unsharp:default -> Stream #1:0 (mjpeg) > Press [q] to stop, [?] for help > [h264 @ 0x557c9a8099c0] Reinit context to 640x480, pix_fmt: yuv420p > [Parsed_scale_2 @ 0x557c9a80fa80] w:720 h:-2 flags:'' interl:0 > [Parsed_hqdn3d_4 @ 0x557c9a7e4180] ls:4.00 cs:3.00 lt:6.00 > ct:4.50 > [graph 0 input from stream 0:0 @ 0x557c9b0d9dc0] w:640 h:480 > pixfmt:yuv420p tb:1/12800 fr:25/1 sar:1/1 > [swscaler @ 0x557c9b0ddb00] deprecated pixel format used, make sure you > did set range correctly > [Parsed_scale_2 @ 0x557c9a80fa80] w:640 h:480 fmt:yuv420p sar:1/1 -> w:720 > h:540 fmt:yuvj420p sar:1/1 flags:0x0004 > [Parsed_setsar_3 @ 0x557c9a80dcc0] w:720 h:540 sar:1/1 dar:4/3 -> sar:1/1 > dar:4/3 > [Parsed_unsharp_5 @ 0x557c9a80fdc0] effect:sharpen type:luma msize_x:5 > msize_y:5 amount:1.00 > [Parsed_unsharp_5 @ 0x557c9a80fdc0] effect:none type:chroma msize_x:5 > msize_y:5 amount:0.00 > [vost#1:0/mjpeg @ 0x557c9b0c44c0] *** 10500 dup! > [vost#1:0/mjpeg @ 0x557c9b0c44c0] More than 1000 frames duplicated > Output #1, image2, to 'test_clip.mp4_img2.jpg': > Metadata: > major_brand : isom > minor_version : 512 > compatible_brands: isomiso2avc1mp41 > encoder : Lavf60.17.100 > Stream #1:0: Video: mjpeg, 1 reference frame, yuvj420p(pc, progressive, > left), 720x540 (0x0) [SAR 1:1 DAR 4:3], q=2-31, 200 kb/s, 25 fps, 25 tbn > Metadata: > encoder : Lavc60.32.102 mjpeg > Side data: > cpb: bitrate max/min/avg: 0/0/20 buffer size: 0 vbv_delay: N/A > Error while filtering: Resource temporarily
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] avfillter/buffersrc: activate and EOF fix
James Almer (12023-11-01): > Can you be more specific? Do you not see the result Jan described? Do you > see something different? Or is it that you do see what he described, but > it's not a proper fix in your opinion as Paul's patch simply prevents the > leak from being triggered in his specific testcase? I posted my console output in the last mail. And even if it did make the bug go away, such an important change is not acceptable without the proof that it is necessary in the commit message. Regards, -- Nicolas George signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ 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".
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] avfillter/buffersrc: activate and EOF fix
On 11/1/2023 10:56 AM, Nicolas George wrote: Jan Ekström (12023-11-01): So my question is: Does this test case not improve for you after you have applied these patches? Or are you speaking of a separate problem which is bad both in master as well as after these patches have been applied? This is the test case Paul posted yesterday (except you had the politeness to de-script it) and I used to see that it does not fix the issue. Can you be more specific? Do you not see the result Jan described? Do you see something different? Or is it that you do see what he described, but it's not a proper fix in your opinion as Paul's patch simply prevents the leak from being triggered in his specific testcase? Anyway, except in the simplest of cases, if a change does not include an analysis of why the problem happens and how the change prevents it from happening the simplest way, then it is not a bug fix, it is just dumb luck. And most likely, the bug is not really gone, it just shifted to not be triggered by the test case. There is no such analysis in Paul's patches. If he can submit such an analysis these patches can move forward. But based on my knowledge of the activate code (I wrote it…) I am pretty certain this kind of bug does not need a source with a single output to be switched to activate. Regards, ___ 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".
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] avfillter/buffersrc: activate and EOF fix
Paul B Mahol (12023-11-01): > It fixes it for me, ffmpeg no longer keeps sending frames to EOF > filtergraph. > And no more memory is allocated and never freed. And that is just LUCK because you changed unrelated things. You have to provide a PROOF, starting with what was wrong in the original code. > I ask you, kindly, once more time, to provide way how to trigger memory > boom (OOM) with those patches applied. I just ran the test case you gave in my usual testing environment. There is nothing I can tell you more, I can just copy-paste the result. Anyway, in the process of analyzing the bug and writing the proof for your fix, you should be able to find out why it is still happening ins subtly different circumstances. ffmpeg version N-112636-g53f9d14063 Copyright (c) 2000-2023 the FFmpeg developers built with gcc 13 (Debian 13.2.0-5) configuration: --enable-shared --disable-static --enable-gpl --enable-libx264 --enable-libopus --enable-libass --enable-libfreetype --enable-opengl --assert-level=2 libavutil 58. 31.100 / 58. 31.100 libavcodec 60. 32.102 / 60. 32.102 libavformat60. 17.100 / 60. 17.100 libavdevice60. 4.100 / 60. 4.100 libavfilter 9. 13.100 / 9. 13.100 libswscale 7. 6.100 / 7. 6.100 libswresample 4. 13.100 / 4. 13.100 libpostproc57. 4.100 / 57. 4.100 [Parsed_scale_2 @ 0x557c9a7e6fc0] w:720 h:-2 flags:'' interl:0 [Parsed_hqdn3d_4 @ 0x557c9a7f4640] ls:4.00 cs:3.00 lt:6.00 ct:4.50 [h264 @ 0x557c9a7e7e40] Reinit context to 640x480, pix_fmt: yuv420p Input #0, mov,mp4,m4a,3gp,3g2,mj2, from '../test_clip.mp4': Metadata: major_brand : isom minor_version : 512 compatible_brands: isomiso2avc1mp41 encoder : Lavf60.17.100 Duration: 00:07:50.00, start: 0.00, bitrate: 1594 kb/s Stream #0:0[0x1](und): Video: h264 (High), 1 reference frame (avc1 / 0x31637661), yuv420p(progressive, left), 640x480 [SAR 1:1 DAR 4:3], 1592 kb/s, 25 fps, 25 tbr, 12800 tbn (default) Metadata: handler_name: VideoHandler vendor_id : [0][0][0][0] encoder : Lavc60.32.102 libx264 [out#0/mp4 @ 0x557c9b07e000] Adding streams from explicit maps... [vost#0:0/copy @ 0x557c9b07f080] Created video stream from input stream 0:0 Output #0, mp4, to '../test_clip.mp4_copy.mp4': Metadata: major_brand : isom minor_version : 512 compatible_brands: isomiso2avc1mp41 encoder : Lavf60.17.100 Stream #0:0(und): Video: h264 (High), 1 reference frame (avc1 / 0x31637661), yuv420p(progressive, left), 640x480 (0x0) [SAR 1:1 DAR 4:3], q=2-31, 1592 kb/s, 25 fps, 25 tbr, 12800 tbn (default) Metadata: handler_name: VideoHandler vendor_id : [0][0][0][0] encoder : Lavc60.32.102 libx264 [out#1/image2 @ 0x557c9b0c1640] Adding streams from explicit maps... [out#1/image2 @ 0x557c9b0c1640] Creating output stream from an explicitly mapped complex filtergraph 0, output [thumb_out] [vost#1:0/mjpeg @ 0x557c9b0c44c0] Created video stream from complex filtergraph 0:[unsharp:default] [vost#1:0/mjpeg @ 0x557c9b0c44c0] Stream mapping: Stream #0:0 (h264) -> split:default Stream #0:0 -> #0:0 (copy) unsharp:default -> Stream #1:0 (mjpeg) Press [q] to stop, [?] for help [h264 @ 0x557c9a8099c0] Reinit context to 640x480, pix_fmt: yuv420p [Parsed_scale_2 @ 0x557c9a80fa80] w:720 h:-2 flags:'' interl:0 [Parsed_hqdn3d_4 @ 0x557c9a7e4180] ls:4.00 cs:3.00 lt:6.00 ct:4.50 [graph 0 input from stream 0:0 @ 0x557c9b0d9dc0] w:640 h:480 pixfmt:yuv420p tb:1/12800 fr:25/1 sar:1/1 [swscaler @ 0x557c9b0ddb00] deprecated pixel format used, make sure you did set range correctly [Parsed_scale_2 @ 0x557c9a80fa80] w:640 h:480 fmt:yuv420p sar:1/1 -> w:720 h:540 fmt:yuvj420p sar:1/1 flags:0x0004 [Parsed_setsar_3 @ 0x557c9a80dcc0] w:720 h:540 sar:1/1 dar:4/3 -> sar:1/1 dar:4/3 [Parsed_unsharp_5 @ 0x557c9a80fdc0] effect:sharpen type:luma msize_x:5 msize_y:5 amount:1.00 [Parsed_unsharp_5 @ 0x557c9a80fdc0] effect:none type:chroma msize_x:5 msize_y:5 amount:0.00 [vost#1:0/mjpeg @ 0x557c9b0c44c0] *** 10500 dup! [vost#1:0/mjpeg @ 0x557c9b0c44c0] More than 1000 frames duplicated Output #1, image2, to 'test_clip.mp4_img2.jpg': Metadata: major_brand : isom minor_version : 512 compatible_brands: isomiso2avc1mp41 encoder : Lavf60.17.100 Stream #1:0: Video: mjpeg, 1 reference frame, yuvj420p(pc, progressive, left), 720x540 (0x0) [SAR 1:1 DAR 4:3], q=2-31, 200 kb/s, 25 fps, 25 tbn Metadata: encoder : Lavc60.32.102 mjpeg Side data: cpb: bitrate max/min/avg: 0/0/20 buffer size: 0 vbv_delay: N/A Error while filtering: Resource temporarily unavailable [vist#0:0/h264 @ 0x557c9a833f00] Decoder thread received EOF packet [vist#0:0/h264 @ 0x557c9a833f00] Decoder returned EOF, finishing [vist#0:0/h264 @ 0x557c9a833f00] Terminating decoder thread [out#0/mp4 @ 0x557c9b07e000] All streams
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] avfillter/buffersrc: activate and EOF fix
On Wed, Nov 1, 2023 at 2:58 PM Nicolas George wrote: > Paul B Mahol (12023-10-31): > > Huh? I fixed this, and you need to give proof that this does not fixes > it. > > It is you wou have to prove that your patches fix anything or are in any > way useful. > It fixes it for me, ffmpeg no longer keeps sending frames to EOF filtergraph. And no more memory is allocated and never freed. I ask you, kindly, once more time, to provide way how to trigger memory boom (OOM) with those patches applied. > > > Because You can be mistaken and/or evil and simply lie. > > Seriously, get a grip. > -- > Nicolas George > ___ > 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".
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] avfillter/buffersrc: activate and EOF fix
Paul B Mahol (12023-10-31): > Huh? I fixed this, and you need to give proof that this does not fixes it. It is you wou have to prove that your patches fix anything or are in any way useful. > Because You can be mistaken and/or evil and simply lie. Seriously, get a grip. -- Nicolas George signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ 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".
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] avfillter/buffersrc: activate and EOF fix
Jan Ekström (12023-11-01): > So my question is: Does this test case not improve for you after you > have applied these patches? Or are you speaking of a separate problem > which is bad both in master as well as after these patches have been > applied? This is the test case Paul posted yesterday (except you had the politeness to de-script it) and I used to see that it does not fix the issue. Anyway, except in the simplest of cases, if a change does not include an analysis of why the problem happens and how the change prevents it from happening the simplest way, then it is not a bug fix, it is just dumb luck. And most likely, the bug is not really gone, it just shifted to not be triggered by the test case. There is no such analysis in Paul's patches. If he can submit such an analysis these patches can move forward. But based on my knowledge of the activate code (I wrote it…) I am pretty certain this kind of bug does not need a source with a single output to be switched to activate. Regards, -- Nicolas George signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ 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".
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] avfillter/buffersrc: activate and EOF fix
On Tue, Oct 31, 2023 at 12:55 PM Nicolas George wrote: > > Paul B Mahol (12023-10-27): > > Both patches are required to fix out of memory scenario with this use case: > > I checked. The OOM still happens with these two patches => they do not > fix the issue => rejected. So for me I have the following memory ballooning test case: 1. build FFmpeg with libx264 (I just haven't had the time to minimize the test case to test other video formats) 2. Check that you have /usr/bin/time (it outputs "Maximum resident set size" when called with -v argument) 3. Create test input with `ffmpeg -v verbose -filter_complex 'testsrc2=r=25:s=640x480:d=470[out]' -map '[out]' -c:v libx264 -preset superfast test_clip.mp4` 4. Run the test case `/usr/bin/time -v ffmpeg -y -v verbose -i test_clip.mp4 -c copy -map 0 -t 470 test_clip.mp4_copy.mp4 -filter_complex "[0:0]split=1[thumb_in];[thumb_in]trim=start=420:end=421,scale=720:-2:threads=1,setsar=1/1,hqdn3d,unsharp[thumb_out]" -map "[thumb_out]" -vframes 1 -f image2 test_clip.mp4_img2.jpg` If the result for this is a maximum resident set size of about 60MiB (f.ex. Maximum resident set size (kbytes): 62752), then things are how they were before trim was switched to activate. If it is closer to 500MiB+ (f.ex. Maximum resident set size (kbytes): 609744), then that is the memory ballooning behavior in action. Results: For current master the result is: bad (over 500MiB and would have kept growing without the time limiting) After applying the two patches: good (back to closer to 50MiB than 500MiB) Exact steps to apply patches: curl -L "https://ffmpeg.org/pipermail/ffmpeg-devel/attachments/20231027/8bf21777/attachment.bin; | git am curl -L "https://ffmpeg.org/pipermail/ffmpeg-devel/attachments/20231027/8bf21777/attachment-0001.bin; | git am I was planning to make a ticket for this, but Paul was too quick to fix this so there is no trac ticket yet. So my question is: Does this test case not improve for you after you have applied these patches? Or are you speaking of a separate problem which is bad both in master as well as after these patches have been applied? Regards, Jan ___ 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".
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] avfillter/buffersrc: activate and EOF fix
On Tue, Oct 31, 2023 at 9:13 PM Paul B Mahol wrote: > > > On Tue, Oct 31, 2023 at 11:55 AM Nicolas George wrote: > >> Paul B Mahol (12023-10-27): >> > Both patches are required to fix out of memory scenario with this use >> case: >> >> I checked. The OOM still happens with these two patches => they do not >> fix the issue => rejected. >> > > Huh? I fixed this, and you need to give proof that this does not fixes it. > Because You can be mistaken and/or evil and simply lie. > Also, JEEB tested it and it also fixes it for him. So I really wonder how you tested this. > > >> >> > This was a test. That you failed. >> >> Are you sure you are mature enough to go on the Internet unsupervised? >> >> -- >> Nicolas George >> ___ >> 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".
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] avfillter/buffersrc: activate and EOF fix
On Tue, Oct 31, 2023 at 11:55 AM Nicolas George wrote: > Paul B Mahol (12023-10-27): > > Both patches are required to fix out of memory scenario with this use > case: > > I checked. The OOM still happens with these two patches => they do not > fix the issue => rejected. > Huh? I fixed this, and you need to give proof that this does not fixes it. Because You can be mistaken and/or evil and simply lie. > > > This was a test. That you failed. > > Are you sure you are mature enough to go on the Internet unsupervised? > > -- > Nicolas George > ___ > 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".
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] avfillter/buffersrc: activate and EOF fix
Paul B Mahol (12023-10-27): > Both patches are required to fix out of memory scenario with this use case: I checked. The OOM still happens with these two patches => they do not fix the issue => rejected. > This was a test. That you failed. Are you sure you are mature enough to go on the Internet unsupervised? -- Nicolas George ___ 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".
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] avfillter/buffersrc: activate and EOF fix
On Sun, Oct 29, 2023 at 10:38 AM Nicolas George wrote: > Paul B Mahol (12023-10-28): > > I did proper analysis already. Pushed. > > Thanks for the precedent, I will gladly do the same to you in the > future. > Haven't yet pushed it. This was a test. That you failed. Still awaiting your 'proper' review. Note that I will not wait too much. > > -- > Nicolas George > ___ > 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".
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] avfillter/buffersrc: activate and EOF fix
Paul B Mahol (12023-10-28): > I did proper analysis already. Pushed. Thanks for the precedent, I will gladly do the same to you in the future. -- Nicolas George signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ 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".
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] avfillter/buffersrc: activate and EOF fix
On Fri, Oct 27, 2023 at 7:54 PM Nicolas George wrote: > Paul B Mahol (12023-10-27): > > As OOM scenarios are bad, will apply this fix soon. > > This bug, if it is a bug, has been here for quite some time already, a > few days more will not change anything. I want to analyze this properly, > do not push before please. > I did proper analysis already. Pushed. > > Regards, > > -- > Nicolas George > ___ > 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".
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] avfillter/buffersrc: activate and EOF fix
Paul B Mahol (12023-10-27): > As OOM scenarios are bad, will apply this fix soon. This bug, if it is a bug, has been here for quite some time already, a few days more will not change anything. I want to analyze this properly, do not push before please. Regards, -- Nicolas George signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ 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".
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] avfillter/buffersrc: activate and EOF fix
On Fri, Oct 27, 2023 at 3:18 PM Paul B Mahol wrote: > > > On Fri, Oct 27, 2023 at 3:02 PM Nicolas George wrote: > >> Paul B Mahol (12023-10-27): >> > Both patches are required to fix out of memory scenario with this use >> case: >> >> Then please attach an analysis of the fix in the commit messages. Bugs >> that just disappear when you rework the code completely are not fixed. >> > > It is log of 2nd patch. > > Basically what happens: buffersrc keeps feeding filtergraph with more > frames after trim filter in that same filtergraph signals EOF. > As OOM scenarios are bad, will apply this fix soon. > > >> >> Regards, >> >> -- >> Nicolas George >> ___ >> 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".
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] avfillter/buffersrc: activate and EOF fix
On Fri, Oct 27, 2023 at 3:02 PM Nicolas George wrote: > Paul B Mahol (12023-10-27): > > Both patches are required to fix out of memory scenario with this use > case: > > Then please attach an analysis of the fix in the commit messages. Bugs > that just disappear when you rework the code completely are not fixed. > It is log of 2nd patch. Basically what happens: buffersrc keeps feeding filtergraph with more frames after trim filter in that same filtergraph signals EOF. > > Regards, > > -- > Nicolas George > ___ > 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".
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] avfillter/buffersrc: activate and EOF fix
Paul B Mahol (12023-10-27): > Both patches are required to fix out of memory scenario with this use case: Then please attach an analysis of the fix in the commit messages. Bugs that just disappear when you rework the code completely are not fixed. Regards, -- Nicolas George ___ 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".
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] avfillter/buffersrc: activate and EOF fix
On Fri, Oct 27, 2023 at 2:54 PM Nicolas George wrote:
> Paul B Mahol (12023-10-27):
> > Subject: [PATCH 1/2] avfilter/buffersrc: switch to activate
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Paul B Mahol
> > ---
> > libavfilter/buffersrc.c | 25 -
> > 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>
> What would be the benefit?
>
> > if (s->eof)
> > -return AVERROR(EINVAL);
> > +return AVERROR_EOF;
> >
>
> AVERROR_EOF does not have a semantic for writing, only for reading, so
> no.
>
Both patches are required to fix out of memory scenario with this use case:
#!/usr/bin/env bash
which ffmpeg
if [ $# -lt 1 ] ; then
echo "Usage: ${0} INPUT"
echo "Example input can be generated with: "
echo " ffmpeg -v verbose -filter_complex
'testsrc2=r=25:s=640x480:d=470[out]' -map '[out]' -c:v libx264 -preset
superfast test_clip.mp4"
exit 1
fi
INPUT="${1}"
COPY_OUTPUT="${INPUT}_copy.mp4"
IMG2_OUTPUT="${INPUT}_img2.jpg"
echo "Input: ${INPUT}"
# if you get ooms, feel free to utilize ulimit
# (ulimit -v 500 && )
valgrind --tool=massif --massif-out-file="massif.out.$(date -Iseconds)" \
ffmpeg \
-y -ignore_unknown \
-v verbose \
-i "${INPUT}" \
-c copy -map 0 \
-t 470 \
"${COPY_OUTPUT}" \
-filter_complex
'[0:0]split=1[thumb_in];[thumb_in]trim=start=420:end=421,scale=720:-2:threads=1,setsar=1/1,hqdn3d,unsharp[thumb_out]'
\
-map "[thumb_out]" \
-vframes 1 \
-f image2 \
"${IMG2_OUTPUT}"
>
> Regards,
>
> --
> Nicolas George
> ___
> 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".
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] avfillter/buffersrc: activate and EOF fix
Paul B Mahol (12023-10-27): > Subject: [PATCH 1/2] avfilter/buffersrc: switch to activate > > Signed-off-by: Paul B Mahol > --- > libavfilter/buffersrc.c | 25 - > 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) What would be the benefit? > if (s->eof) > -return AVERROR(EINVAL); > +return AVERROR_EOF; > AVERROR_EOF does not have a semantic for writing, only for reading, so no. Regards, -- Nicolas George ___ 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] [PATCH] avfillter/buffersrc: activate and EOF fix
Patches attached.
From 8cbfb1beddcdede7c50a0879ac21654cba02f6b5 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Paul B Mahol
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2023 14:26:50 +0200
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] avfilter/buffersrc: switch to activate
Signed-off-by: Paul B Mahol
---
libavfilter/buffersrc.c | 25 -
1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
diff --git a/libavfilter/buffersrc.c b/libavfilter/buffersrc.c
index 453fc0fd5c..1216904721 100644
--- a/libavfilter/buffersrc.c
+++ b/libavfilter/buffersrc.c
@@ -36,6 +36,7 @@
#include "audio.h"
#include "avfilter.h"
#include "buffersrc.h"
+#include "filters.h"
#include "formats.h"
#include "internal.h"
#include "video.h"
@@ -484,21 +485,28 @@ static int config_props(AVFilterLink *link)
return 0;
}
-static int request_frame(AVFilterLink *link)
+static int activate(AVFilterContext *ctx)
{
-BufferSourceContext *c = link->src->priv;
+AVFilterLink *outlink = ctx->outputs[0];
+BufferSourceContext *c = ctx->priv;
+
+if (!c->eof && ff_outlink_get_status(outlink)) {
+c->eof = 1;
+return 0;
+}
-if (c->eof)
-return AVERROR_EOF;
+if (c->eof) {
+ff_outlink_set_status(outlink, AVERROR_EOF, c->last_pts);
+return 0;
+}
c->nb_failed_requests++;
-return AVERROR(EAGAIN);
+return FFERROR_NOT_READY;
}
static const AVFilterPad avfilter_vsrc_buffer_outputs[] = {
{
.name = "default",
.type = AVMEDIA_TYPE_VIDEO,
-.request_frame = request_frame,
.config_props = config_props,
},
};
@@ -507,7 +515,7 @@ const AVFilter ff_vsrc_buffer = {
.name = "buffer",
.description = NULL_IF_CONFIG_SMALL("Buffer video frames, and make them accessible to the filterchain."),
.priv_size = sizeof(BufferSourceContext),
-
+.activate = activate,
.init = init_video,
.uninit= uninit,
@@ -521,7 +529,6 @@ static const AVFilterPad avfilter_asrc_abuffer_outputs[] = {
{
.name = "default",
.type = AVMEDIA_TYPE_AUDIO,
-.request_frame = request_frame,
.config_props = config_props,
},
};
@@ -530,7 +537,7 @@ const AVFilter ff_asrc_abuffer = {
.name = "abuffer",
.description = NULL_IF_CONFIG_SMALL("Buffer audio frames, and make them accessible to the filterchain."),
.priv_size = sizeof(BufferSourceContext),
-
+.activate = activate,
.init = init_audio,
.uninit= uninit,
--
2.42.0
From 6bb41a6d27800825610d6dc77c8c0d7cf5c3a8e8 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Paul B Mahol
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2023 14:33:00 +0200
Subject: [PATCH 2/2] avfilter/buffersrc: return AVERROR_EOF on EOF
Fixes error when user keeps adding frames into filtergraph
that reached EOF by other means, for example EOF is signalled
by other filter in filtergraph or by buffersink.
Signed-off-by: Paul B Mahol
---
libavfilter/buffersrc.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/libavfilter/buffersrc.c b/libavfilter/buffersrc.c
index 1216904721..b0a905d455 100644
--- a/libavfilter/buffersrc.c
+++ b/libavfilter/buffersrc.c
@@ -195,7 +195,7 @@ FF_ENABLE_DEPRECATION_WARNINGS
if (!frame)
return av_buffersrc_close(ctx, s->last_pts, flags);
if (s->eof)
-return AVERROR(EINVAL);
+return AVERROR_EOF;
s->last_pts = frame->pts + frame->duration;
--
2.42.0
___
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".
