> -Original Message-
> From: ffmpeg-devel [mailto:ffmpeg-devel-boun...@ffmpeg.org] On Behalf Of Mark
> Thompson
> Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2018 2:13 AM
> To: ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
> Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavc/amfenc: Retain a reference to D3D
> frames used as input
On 09/04/18 17:48, Alexander Kravchenko wrote:
> Hi, could you please review updated patch?
>
> Fixes according on Mark's review:
> * Macroses changed to functions
> * error level of AMF_RETURN_IF_FALSE changed to fatal (all cases it returns
> are fatal according on fatal error level
Hi, could you please review updated patch?
Fixes according on Mark's review:
* Macroses changed to functions
* error level of AMF_RETURN_IF_FALSE changed to fatal (all cases it returns are
fatal according on fatal error level description)
* used AMF_RETURN_IF_FALSE for case if a frame reference
On 08/04/18 20:13, Alexander Kravchenko wrote:
>
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: ffmpeg-devel [mailto:ffmpeg-devel-boun...@ffmpeg.org] On Behalf
>> Of Mark Thompson
>> Sent: Sunday, April 8, 2018 8:25 PM
>> To: ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
>> Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavc/amfenc:
> -Original Message-
> From: ffmpeg-devel [mailto:ffmpeg-devel-boun...@ffmpeg.org] On Behalf
> Of Mark Thompson
> Sent: Sunday, April 8, 2018 8:25 PM
> To: ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
> Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavc/amfenc: Retain a reference to D3D
> frames used as input during
On 06/04/18 11:25, Alexander Kravchenko wrote:
>>
>> This breaks the testcase described in
>> https://trac.ffmpeg.org/ticket/6990 which is basically the same as the
>> one you described in this patch.
>>
>> I get the following spammed repeatedly:
>>
>> [AVHWFramesContext @ 0502d340] Static
> >> This breaks the testcase described in
> >> https://trac.ffmpeg.org/ticket/6990 which is basically the same as the
> >> one you described in this patch.
> >>
> >> I get the following spammed repeatedly:
> >>
> >> [AVHWFramesContext @ 0502d340] Static surface pool size exceeded.
> >>
On 4/6/2018 7:25 AM, Alexander Kravchenko wrote:
>>
>> This breaks the testcase described in
>> https://trac.ffmpeg.org/ticket/6990 which is basically the same as the
>> one you described in this patch.
>>
>> I get the following spammed repeatedly:
>>
>> [AVHWFramesContext @ 0502d340]
>
> This breaks the testcase described in
> https://trac.ffmpeg.org/ticket/6990 which is basically the same as the
> one you described in this patch.
>
> I get the following spammed repeatedly:
>
> [AVHWFramesContext @ 0502d340] Static surface pool size exceeded.
> [mpeg2video @
>
> This breaks the testcase described in
> https://trac.ffmpeg.org/ticket/6990 which is basically the same as the
> one you described in this patch.
>
> I get the following spammed repeatedly:
>
> [AVHWFramesContext @ 0502d340] Static surface pool size exceeded.
> [mpeg2video @
On 4/5/2018 12:23 PM, Alexander Kravchenko wrote:
>
> This fixes frame corruption issue when decoder started reusing frames while
> they are still in use of encoding process
> Issue with frame corruption was reproduced using:
> ffmpeg.exe -y -hwaccel d3d11va -hwaccel_output_format d3d11 -i
This fixes frame corruption issue when decoder started reusing frames while
they are still in use of encoding process
Issue with frame corruption was reproduced using:
ffmpeg.exe -y -hwaccel d3d11va -hwaccel_output_format d3d11 -i input.h264 -an
-c:v h264_amf output.mkv
Previous questions
12 matches
Mail list logo