On Mon, 21 Mar 2016 11:34:11 +0100 Thilo Borgmann <thilo.borgm...@mail.de> wrote:
> Am 21.03.16 um 08:23 schrieb wm4: > > On Sun, 20 Mar 2016 16:49:18 +0100 > > Thilo Borgmann <thilo.borgm...@mail.de> wrote: > > > >> Hi, > >> > >> trying to handle software fallback more consistently for videotoolbox and > >> probably other hardware accelerations. > >> > >> Addresses ticket #5352 where software fallback is demanded which has been > >> removed on purpose before. With this patch the user can configure the > >> desired > >> behaviour. > >> > >> -Thilo > > > > Please explain how a hwaccel that uses no hardware decoding makes any > > sense at all. > > Checking compliance, comparing output/performance, work around a possible bug > in > an alternative decoder... of course it is no alternative if you need/want the > benefits of hardware decoding but there are use cases that come to mind. > And maybe you don't have an alternative decoder at hand... But it's integrated as hwaccel, so most of these arguments don't make too much sense to me. Please don't touch the hwaccel thing, and wait until there's a separate videotolbox decoder. _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
