[MPlayer-dev-eng] Re: [PATCHES] iec958 and unichrome

[Ivan Kalvachev]

2006/8/2, Remus Koos <remuskoos at yahoo.com>:
>
>   Hi !
>
> > Are you sure there weren't any patch for at least pre7?
>
>   No, I'm not ;-) ... The latest unichrome patch on the unichrome site was for
> pre6. So I assumed that this is the latest available.
>
> > Please check the archives to spare yourself un-necessary trouble.
>
>   Well, I already ported it ;-) ...
>
> > http://remus.gotdns.com/the2nd/mplayer-1.0pre8-unichrome-0.5.patch
> >
> > I don't have any hardware that can take advantage of these patches,
>
>   I have the hardware and I tested it. It works pretty well. Depending on the
> case the use of the xvmc device gives you between 10%-30% less CPU utilization.
> Let me know if you need more help with that.
>
> > yet I figured that it would be good if these patches were merged because
> > they are valuable.
>
>   Agree with that one. That's why I would like to have it included so it
> doesn't have to be ported again for the next version.
>
> > The problem is that their design doesn't fit quite too nicely with
> > MPlayer's, so it makes it quite hard to merge them properly (a bit the
> > same kinda problem as DVDnav patches).
>
>   I'm not sure what's the design of the patch since I didn't write it but it
> applies and compiles cleanly (I even fixed the issues pointed out by Diego
> ;-)).
>   The question is if it can be included in the mplayer code.
>   I also created a small patch to fix playing video files through the iec958
> interface. Could it be applied also ?
>
> > Guillaume
>
>   Let me know if you need any help with testing these, etc.
>   Thanks,

The unichrome patch was proposed and rejected. I don't see any of the
reason addressed in the updated one. So it still stays rejected.

To summarize. xxmc and xvmc should not be mutually exclusive and
ffmpeg should not call xxmc specific functions.