On 1/29/19, Carl Eugen Hoyos <ceffm...@gmail.com> wrote: > 2019-01-28 19:40 GMT+01:00, Paul B Mahol <one...@gmail.com>: >> On 1/28/19, Carl Eugen Hoyos <ceffm...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> 2019-01-28 16:17 GMT+01:00, Paul B Mahol <one...@gmail.com>: >>>> On 1/28/19, Carl Eugen Hoyos <ceffm...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> 2019-01-28 15:20 GMT+01:00, Paul B Mahol <one...@gmail.com>: >>>>>> On 1/28/19, Carl Eugen Hoyos <ceffm...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> Hi! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Attached patch fixes the actual output duration for AMR-WB samples >>>>>>> with NO_DATA frames. >>>>>>> A follow-up patch also skips corrupted frames, making the output of >>>>>>> the sample in ticket #7113 very similar to the reference decoder. >>>>>> >>>>>> Very similar does not mean much! >>>>> >>>>> Since some frames are broken (and not just corrupted) and the >>>>> codec uses floats internally, I don't think this is relevant. >>>>> >>>>> In addition, this patch is not about similarity in the output but >>>>> duration, so your comment does not apply here. >>>>> >>>>> Is this patch ok? >>>> >>>> Only if you can confirm that output is same as reference decoder >>>> expect rounding. >>> >>> Sorry for the misunderstanding: >>> This patch does not aim to make the output more similar to >>> any other decoder, it only fixes the actual output duration >>> when decoding. >> >> Than patch is incorrect. > > I don't understand: > We have a sample that decodes with too short duration with current > FFmpeg, the patch fixes this: Why is the patch incorrect? > > I realize now that by fixing the "missing" parts in the output file, it of > course does make the file (significantly) more similar to the > reference output - but it does not change the parts of the output > that were already there.
The patch is incomplete and thus incorrect. _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel