[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] Remove swscale_internal.h:fmt_depth()

Måns Rullgård mans
Mon Jan 18 00:16:42 CET 2010


Michael Niedermayer <michaelni at gmx.at> writes:

> On Sun, Jan 17, 2010 at 11:36:26PM +0100, Stefano Sabatini wrote:
>> On date Sunday 2010-01-17 22:04:47 +0100, Michael Niedermayer encoded:
>> > On Sun, Jan 17, 2010 at 06:46:40PM +0100, Stefano Sabatini wrote:
>> > > On date Saturday 2010-01-16 17:08:48 -0200, Ramiro Polla encoded:
>> > > > Hi,
>> > > > 
>> > > > On Sat, Jan 16, 2010 at 4:59 PM, Stefano Sabatini
>> > > > <stefano.sabatini-lala at poste.it> wrote:
>> > > > > Hi, I'm aware this patch introduces a slow-down, an idea would be to
>> > > > > initialize a ff_bits_per_pixel array during the init phase, and then
>> > > > > use a function of the kind:
>> > > > >
>> > > > > static inline int fmt_depth(int fmt)
>> > > > > {
>> > > > > ? ?return ff_bits_per_pixel[fmt];
>> > > > > }
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Would be that acceptable?
>> > > > > In this case can you suggest where to initialize stuff?
>> > > > 
>> > > > I think all code that uses fmt_depth currently should eventually be
>> > > > moved to some init code that's only run once, and so a small slow-down
>> > > > wouldn't be a problem.
>> > > 
>> > > Check the attached: smaller, more extensible, faster, the price is a
>> > > little more bloat in the context.
>> > > 
>> > 
>> > > Regression test passed.
>> > 
>> > if(regression == swscale_example) patch ok
>> > else not ok
>> 
>> I had to hack swscale-example since the recent change in pixfmt.h
>> broke it (BTW does it ever worked with big-endian system?), anyway
>
> i suspect yes
> but people are always eager to fix bugs at the wrong place and its so
> easy to flip a rgb<->bgr that i cannot test
>
>> what should I test with swscale-example?
>
> everything you plan to commit to swscale:)

We should hook it up in make test somehow.  Can't be hard.

-- 
M?ns Rullg?rd
mans at mansr.com



More information about the ffmpeg-devel mailing list