[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH]lavc/amrwbdec: Do not ignore NO_DATA frames

Paul B Mahol onemda at gmail.com
Tue Jan 29 23:36:32 EET 2019


On 1/29/19, Carl Eugen Hoyos <ceffmpeg at gmail.com> wrote:
> 2019-01-29 10:10 GMT+01:00, Paul B Mahol <onemda at gmail.com>:
>> On 1/29/19, Carl Eugen Hoyos <ceffmpeg at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 2019-01-28 19:40 GMT+01:00, Paul B Mahol <onemda at gmail.com>:
>>>> On 1/28/19, Carl Eugen Hoyos <ceffmpeg at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> 2019-01-28 16:17 GMT+01:00, Paul B Mahol <onemda at gmail.com>:
>>>>>> On 1/28/19, Carl Eugen Hoyos <ceffmpeg at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> 2019-01-28 15:20 GMT+01:00, Paul B Mahol <onemda at gmail.com>:
>>>>>>>> On 1/28/19, Carl Eugen Hoyos <ceffmpeg at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Hi!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Attached patch fixes the actual output duration for AMR-WB samples
>>>>>>>>> with NO_DATA frames.
>>>>>>>>> A follow-up patch also skips corrupted frames, making the output of
>>>>>>>>> the sample in ticket #7113 very similar to the reference decoder.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Very similar does not mean much!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Since some frames are broken (and not just corrupted) and the
>>>>>>> codec uses floats internally, I don't think this is relevant.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In addition, this patch is not about similarity in the output but
>>>>>>> duration, so your comment does not apply here.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Is this patch ok?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Only if you can confirm that output is same as reference decoder
>>>>>> expect rounding.
>>>>>
>>>>> Sorry for the misunderstanding:
>>>>> This patch does not aim to make the output more similar to
>>>>> any other decoder, it only fixes the actual output duration
>>>>> when decoding.
>>>>
>>>> Than patch is incorrect.
>>>
>>> I don't understand:
>>> We have a sample that decodes with too short duration with current
>>> FFmpeg, the patch fixes this: Why is the patch incorrect?
>>>
>>> I realize now that by fixing the "missing" parts in the output file, it
>>> of
>>> course does make the file (significantly) more similar to the
>>> reference output - but it does not change the parts of the output
>>> that were already there.
>>
>> The patch is incomplete and thus incorrect.
>
> Do you mean it does not fix the duration of the NO_DATA frames?
>

Duration is irrelevant.

> Carl Eugen
> _______________________________________________
> ffmpeg-devel mailing list
> ffmpeg-devel at ffmpeg.org
> http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
>


More information about the ffmpeg-devel mailing list