On Mon, 22 Jul 2024 at 17:17, Timo Rothenpieler <t...@rothenpieler.org> wrote: > > On 23/07/2024 01:01, Josh Allmann wrote: > > On Tue, 9 Jul 2024 at 12:06, Josh Allmann <joshua.allm...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> Encoders may emit a buffering period SEI without a corresponding > >> SPS/PPS if the SPS/PPS is carried out-of-band, eg with avcc. > >> > >> During Annex B conversion, this may result in the SPS/PPS being > >> inserted *after* the buffering period SEI but before the IDR NAL. > >> > >> Since the buffering period SEI references the SPS, the SPS/PPS > >> needs to come first. > >> --- > >> > >> Notes: > >> v2: Updated FATE test refs > >> > >> libavcodec/bsf/h264_mp4toannexb.c | 13 +++++++++++++ > >> tests/ref/fate/h264-bsf-mp4toannexb | 2 +- > >> tests/ref/fate/h264_mp4toannexb_ticket2991 | 18 +++++++++--------- > >> tests/ref/fate/segment-mp4-to-ts | 12 ++++++------ > >> 4 files changed, 29 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-) > >> > > > > Ping again for review. Looking at the FATE output, this patch fixes a number > > of things - see [1] for details > > patch generally looks good to me, but I'm not closely familiar with the > code there. >
Thanks, is there anyone else more familiar with the code who can also sign off on this patch? Josh _______________________________________________ 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".
