Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH v3 0/2] libavfilter/vf_fps: Rewrite using activate callback
Calvin Walton (2018-02-22):
> This revision of the patch fixes statistics by counting the number of
> times each frame has been output, rather than trying to guess at the
> time each frame is output whether it was a duplicate or drop.
>
> I ended up leaving the conditional check
> if (s->status && s->frames_count == 0) {
> at the bottom of the activate function. I think I agree that the
> condition will always be true, based on the code flow, but the if
> statement documents the condition just as well as an assert would, and
> it's not like the EOF handling is in a hot path where we'd want to
> compile out the check.
>
> Calvin Walton (2):
> libavfilter/vf_fps: Rewrite using activate callback
> libavfilter/vf_fps: Minor cleanups
>
> libavfilter/vf_fps.c | 392
> ++-
> 1 file changed, 202 insertions(+), 190 deletions(-)
I just pushed. Thanks for the patch and sorry for the delay.
Regards,
--
Nicolas George
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
___
ffmpeg-devel mailing list
ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH v3 0/2] libavfilter/vf_fps: Rewrite using activate callback
Calvin Walton (2018-03-02): > Ping? > > I've been using this patch set in my production system for the past > week. There I've been running some fairly complicated filter pipelines > generated by scripts with good results - it's working reliably (no > stalls/hangs) and has solved my memory usage issue. Sorry, I was busy on other occupations. I will get back to it as soon as possible. Regards, -- Nicolas George signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH v3 0/2] libavfilter/vf_fps: Rewrite using activate callback
Ping?
I've been using this patch set in my production system for the past
week. There I've been running some fairly complicated filter pipelines
generated by scripts with good results - it's working reliably (no
stalls/hangs) and has solved my memory usage issue.
Calvin.
On Thu, 2018-02-22 at 14:10 -0500, Calvin Walton wrote:
> This revision of the patch fixes statistics by counting the number of
> times each frame has been output, rather than trying to guess at the
> time each frame is output whether it was a duplicate or drop.
>
> I ended up leaving the conditional check
> if (s->status && s->frames_count == 0) {
> at the bottom of the activate function. I think I agree that the
> condition will always be true, based on the code flow, but the if
> statement documents the condition just as well as an assert would, and
> it's not like the EOF handling is in a hot path where we'd want to
> compile out the check.
>
> Calvin Walton (2):
> libavfilter/vf_fps: Rewrite using activate callback
> libavfilter/vf_fps: Minor cleanups
>
> libavfilter/vf_fps.c | 392
> ++-
> 1 file changed, 202 insertions(+), 190 deletions(-)
>
--
Calvin Walton
___
ffmpeg-devel mailing list
ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH v3 0/2] libavfilter/vf_fps: Rewrite using activate callback
This revision of the patch fixes statistics by counting the number of
times each frame has been output, rather than trying to guess at the
time each frame is output whether it was a duplicate or drop.
I ended up leaving the conditional check
if (s->status && s->frames_count == 0) {
at the bottom of the activate function. I think I agree that the
condition will always be true, based on the code flow, but the if
statement documents the condition just as well as an assert would, and
it's not like the EOF handling is in a hot path where we'd want to
compile out the check.
Calvin Walton (2):
libavfilter/vf_fps: Rewrite using activate callback
libavfilter/vf_fps: Minor cleanups
libavfilter/vf_fps.c | 392 ++-
1 file changed, 202 insertions(+), 190 deletions(-)
--
2.16.2
___
ffmpeg-devel mailing list
ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
