On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 2:59 PM, Muhammad Faiz wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 26, 2016 at 4:20 PM, Muhammad Faiz wrote:
>> On Sun, Jun 26, 2016 at 3:22 PM, Paul B Mahol wrote:
>>> On 6/26/16, Muhammad Faiz wrote:
On Sun, Jun
On Sun, Jun 26, 2016 at 4:20 PM, Muhammad Faiz wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 26, 2016 at 3:22 PM, Paul B Mahol wrote:
>> On 6/26/16, Muhammad Faiz wrote:
>>> On Sun, Jun 26, 2016 at 2:30 PM, Paul B Mahol wrote:
On 6/26/16,
On Sun, Jun 26, 2016 at 3:22 PM, Paul B Mahol wrote:
> On 6/26/16, Muhammad Faiz wrote:
>> On Sun, Jun 26, 2016 at 2:30 PM, Paul B Mahol wrote:
>>> On 6/26/16, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote:
Muhammad Faiz gmail.com> writes:
On 6/26/16, Muhammad Faiz wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 26, 2016 at 2:30 PM, Paul B Mahol wrote:
>> On 6/26/16, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote:
>>> Muhammad Faiz gmail.com> writes:
>>>
I think it's not because of bit-exact problem.
But because
On Sun, Jun 26, 2016 at 2:30 PM, Paul B Mahol wrote:
> On 6/26/16, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote:
>> Muhammad Faiz gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> I think it's not because of bit-exact problem.
>>> But because fate probes supported formats (with
>>>
On Sun, Jun 26, 2016 at 9:30 AM, Paul B Mahol wrote:
> On 6/26/16, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote:
>> Muhammad Faiz gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> I think it's not because of bit-exact problem.
>>> But because fate probes supported formats (with
>>>
On 6/26/16, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote:
> Muhammad Faiz gmail.com> writes:
>
>> I think it's not because of bit-exact problem.
>> But because fate probes supported formats (with
>> libavfilter/tests/filtfmts)
>> On BE machine, code with native formats will generate error
>> because
Muhammad Faiz gmail.com> writes:
> I think it's not because of bit-exact problem.
> But because fate probes supported formats (with libavfilter/tests/filtfmts)
> On BE machine, code with native formats will generate error
> because fate-ref contains yuv*le entries but fate expects yuv*be
We
On Sun, Jun 26, 2016 at 1:51 AM, Paul B Mahol wrote:
> On 6/25/16, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote:
>> Paul B Mahol gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> >>+AV_PIX_FMT_YUV420P9LE, AV_PIX_FMT_YUVA420P9LE,
>>> >
>>> > Why not use native endian format?
>>>
>>> Because of
On 6/25/16, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote:
> Paul B Mahol gmail.com> writes:
>
>> >>+AV_PIX_FMT_YUV420P9LE, AV_PIX_FMT_YUVA420P9LE,
>> >
>> > Why not use native endian format?
>>
>> Because of fate test.
>
> Isn't the byte-swapping (that could be used for the
> fate test)
Paul B Mahol gmail.com> writes:
> >>+AV_PIX_FMT_YUV420P9LE, AV_PIX_FMT_YUVA420P9LE,
> >
> > Why not use native endian format?
>
> Because of fate test.
Isn't the byte-swapping (that could be used for the
fate test) bit-exact? Or do I miss something?
Carl Eugen
On 6/25/16, Muhammad Faiz wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 25, 2016 at 1:23 AM, Paul B Mahol wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> patch attached.
>>
>
> >From 5b55c9c44ea103cdff3c34882dbcca29902728a4 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>>From: Paul B Mahol
>>Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2016
On Sat, Jun 25, 2016 at 1:23 AM, Paul B Mahol wrote:
> Hi,
>
> patch attached.
>
>From 5b55c9c44ea103cdff3c34882dbcca29902728a4 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>From: Paul B Mahol
>Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2016 20:16:22 +0200
>Subject: [PATCH] avfilter/vf_rotate: add >8
Hi,
patch attached.
From 5b55c9c44ea103cdff3c34882dbcca29902728a4 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Paul B Mahol
Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2016 20:16:22 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] avfilter/vf_rotate: add >8 bit depth support
Signed-off-by: Paul B Mahol
---
14 matches
Mail list logo