[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH 1/6] Frame-based multithreading framework using pthreads
Tue Nov 16 04:50:29 CET 2010
On Nov 15, 2010, at 1:30 PM, Alexander Strange wrote:
> On Nov 15, 2010, at 12:56 PM, Alexander Strange wrote:
>> On Nov 15, 2010, at 12:20 PM, Reimar D?ffinger wrote:
>>> I'd still prefer for the threading being hidden from the application,
>>> in particular no new requirements on get/release_buffer, but
>>> I fear I'm not going to win that argument.
>> This can be done but I think it would seriously compromise speed (from the client's point of view).
>> libavcodec would have to block the client thread by waiting for the codec to message back to it asking
>> for the buffer callback to be called. That's clock time that could be spent in the client code doing something useful.
>> The problem here is just that I used "thread-safe", which doesn't mean anything, instead of the real requirement,
>> which is that it can't use thread-local variables. Nothing to do with reentrancy or locks.
> Sorry, uau pointed out I'm wrong here. The thread can call the client's get_buffer() while the main thread is running client code, and obviously then it can do something unsafe.
> The extra-safe option is to make frame threading opt-in, so committing it will never break anyone's client unless they turn it on. I don't mind that, but clients not paying attention might forget to add the code.
> Another option would be to block the client thread until it's done with buffer operations, but allow clients to declare their callbacks completely thread-safe and get out of that for some more speed. Either way they'd still have to avoid thread-local data, but I think that's not a problem.
Actually, pretty sure this is impossible in general. We can't know when the thread will be done calling get_buffer() (codecs can do it more than once, unless we just forbid them from having weird calling patterns), and obviously it defeats the point of MT if we wait forever.
> And we should document that the interface used is always pthreads, so they can compile with the same wrapper library if needed.
> ...but note that native w32threads can and already do call back into draw_horiz_band(), so that one's still going to be different.
>> I am certain that no client does this anyway, except for a one-line patch to add an NSAutoreleasePool to mplayer's OS X vo which I'll send soon.
>>>> +* There is one frame of delay added for every thread beyond the first one.
>>>> + Clients using dts must account for the delay; pts sent through reordered_opaque
>>>> + will work as usual.
>>> Is there a way to query this? I mean the application
>>> knows how many threads it set, but that might not always
>>> be the same number as FFmpeg uses or so?
>> It always uses the number of threads set. If this changes - it might, because frame-decoding threads should be able to use execute() too, and currently they don't - we'll have to maintain that invariant or introduce a better way of tracking dts. Both of which we should do anyway.
More information about the ffmpeg-devel