On Sat, 22 Sep 2007, Martin Zlomek wrote:
It seems that it is wrong, but it is not really true. You are right that I have applied formula 8-37 in "8.2.4.3.1 Reordering process of reference picture lists for short-term reference pictures" section of h.264 spec in a wrong way, but it is "fixed" in each following loop of the for-cycle by line
pred &= h->max_pic_num - 1;
Yes, your new patch makes this much clearer. I've got my head wrapped around the whole PicNum thing now.
Anyway, my previously posted patch should be replaced by the attached one; it has the same effect but looks better.
Yes, I agree - and it is obviously better than the one I posted. I still want to keep this separate from the main PAFF patch since it is fixing something that was broken before (and after) the PAFF implementation. -Jeff