[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] h264chroma: remove duplicate 9/10 bit functions.

Michael Niedermayer michaelni at gmx.at
Mon Feb 11 04:34:26 CET 2013

On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 07:04:07PM -0800, Ronald S. Bultje wrote:
> Hi,
> On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 5:22 PM, Michael Niedermayer <michaelni at gmx.at> wrote:
> > On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 04:40:19PM -0800, Ronald S. Bultje wrote:
> >> From: "Ronald S. Bultje" <rsbultje at gmail.com>
> >>
> >> Also use the resulting 16bpp functions for anything >8 and <=16, not just
> >> 9 and 10. This fixes 12 and 14bpp H264 support.
> >
> > How can i test/verify this bugfix ?
> > I tried a few files but notice no difference, they either worked
> > already or still dont work
> You see that currently it uses 8bpp chroma for !=9 && !=10, right?

yes, recent regression introduced by 79dad2a9
the new code should probably also use <=16 instead of <16

But the SIMD changes look wrong, the code supports 10bit not >10bit

with a sample file that excercises these functions it would
be easy to test

> Whether 12/14 bpp works in general is hard to test, you never added a
> fate test so it's impossible to say when it worked and when it didn't.
> But it clearly doesn't work 100% right now (except for 444/grayscale
> content).

I can upload any files that are needed to the fate rsync server if
you want to add fate tests (which would be very welcome!)


Michael     GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB

Those who are best at talking, realize last or never when they are wrong.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://ffmpeg.org/pipermail/ffmpeg-devel/attachments/20130211/acfea957/attachment.asc>

More information about the ffmpeg-devel mailing list