[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH]Fix MPlayer VC1 vdpau decoding

[Michael Niedermayer]

On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 09:28:30AM +0100, Gwenole Beauchesne wrote:
> On Wed, 25 Feb 2009, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> 
> >> Index: libmpcodecs/vd_ffmpeg.c
> >> ===================================================================
> >> --- libmpcodecs/vd_ffmpeg.c	(revision 28734)
> >> +++ libmpcodecs/vd_ffmpeg.c	(working copy)
> >> @@ -916,7 +916,7 @@
> >>          avctx->draw_horiz_band = draw_slice;
> >>          mp_msg(MSGT_DECVIDEO, MSGL_INFO, MSGTR_MPCODECS_XVMCAcceleratedMPEG2);
> >>          assert(ctx->do_dr1);//these are must to!
> >> -        assert(ctx->do_slices); //it is (vo_)ffmpeg bug if this fails
> >> +//        assert(ctx->do_slices); //it is (vo_)ffmpeg bug if this fails
> >>          avctx->slice_flags=SLICE_FLAG_CODED_ORDER|SLICE_FLAG_ALLOW_FIELD;
> >>      }
> >>      return selected_format;
> >
> > why is this change needed but wasnt before?
> 
> Most likely VC-1 decoding was not tested since it was not widely available 
> at that time. IIRC, do_slices is set if CODEC_CAP_DRAW_HORIZ_BAND is set 
> in the codec, which VC-1 doesn't.
> 
> Would any of the following be correct?
> - Set the flag for VC-1 et al.
> - Set do_slices if hwaccel, as it would/were the case for do_dr1?
> 
> The latter sounds more practical.

i was just asking "why?" i didnt reject it. If it never worked with that
assert() then its removial is likely fine.
I just thought "hey why is this commented out now? how could a recent
change have made that needed?"

[...]

-- 
Michael     GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB

If a bugfix only changes things apparently unrelated to the bug with no
further explanation, that is a good sign that the bugfix is wrong.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.mplayerhq.hu/pipermail/ffmpeg-devel/attachments/20090226/d532f018/attachment.pgp>