On Wed, 28 Jun 2017 13:49:28 +0100 Mark Thompson <s...@jkqxz.net> wrote:
> On 28/06/17 12:09, wm4 wrote: > > On Tue, 27 Jun 2017 22:50:45 +0100 > > Mark Thompson <s...@jkqxz.net> wrote: > > > >> Supports all surface formats in common between the two. > >> --- > >> configure | 6 + > >> libavutil/hwcontext_internal.h | 3 + > >> libavutil/hwcontext_opencl.c | 298 > >> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > >> libavutil/hwcontext_vaapi.c | 9 ++ > >> 4 files changed, 316 insertions(+) > >> > > > > Can't say much except: > > 1. It looks like we'll have NxM mapping implementation, and I question > > whether they really should exist as ifdef mess in the individual > > hwcontext impls, instead of a more structured approach (like one > > soruce file per N-M mapping). > > I don't think we actually will have that many. OpenCL looks nasty here > because it's a common leaf node which a lot of other things can map to, but > that isn't true for most others. > > > 2. ff_vaapi_fourcc_from_pix_fmt() is also funny - sure that we > > shouldn't have a more general public format mapping API like I > > suggested once with a patch? > > That would be nice. Would you like to resurrect that patch? Depends on elenril, I guess. _______________________________________________ libav-devel mailing list libav-devel@libav.org https://lists.libav.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-devel
