[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH 12/18] avformat/hls: parse ID3 timestamps for elementary audio streams

Anssi Hannula anssi.hannula at iki.fi
Fri Jan 3 13:14:49 CET 2014

03.01.2014 14:04, Michael Niedermayer kirjoitti:
> On Fri, Jan 03, 2014 at 07:13:18AM +0200, Anssi Hannula wrote:
>> 03.01.2014 06:33, Michael Niedermayer kirjoitti:
>>> On Fri, Jan 03, 2014 at 04:21:03AM +0200, Anssi Hannula wrote:
>>>> 31.12.2013 09:15, Michael Niedermayer kirjoitti:
>>>>> On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 08:20:19AM +0200, Anssi Hannula wrote:
>>>>>> I seem to now be hitting "first_dts 895690 not matching first dts 920758
>>>>>> (pts 920758, duration 2089) in the queue" for every packet after the
>>>>>> first one (only the first one has actual dts), though...
>>>>>> I have to quit debugging now for a while, but if you know off-hand what
>>>>>> I'm doing wrong (if anything - just noticed it is only AV_LOG_DEBUG) it
>>>>>> would save me some time :)
>>>>> if the timestamps you get are correct then you can probably ignore it
>>>>> this message can get printed when nothing is really wrong ...
>>>>>> I have AVSTREAM_PARSE_FULL and I set pkt->dts for first pkt, and later
>>>>>> ones have AV_NOPTS_VALUE (the interspersed timestamps aren't yet handled).
>>>> Since there are several hundred non-timestamped packets between the
>>>> timestamped packets, the fact that compute_pkt_fields() rounds the
>>>> computed frame duration down (utils.c line ~1096) will cause the packet
>>>> timestamps to fall behind of the actual time (approx. ~5ms for 48kHz @
>>>> 1024 samples/pkt with 10sec segments,
>>> this sounds a bit odd, mpeg has strict rules on how often timestamps
>>> must be stored
>>> without checking the spec i think the max duration between timestamps
>>> was below 1 sec
>>> so several hundread packets of 1024 samples sound like too much
>> Well this is just raw audio elementary stream (with no timestamps) with
>> HLS-specific ID3 timestamp in the beginning of every HLS segment (spec
>> says a "typical" segment duration is 10sec, but there is no limit).
>> I don't think the MPEG spec has much say in this, or does it?
>> I must admit I'm not 100% sure what the "MPEG-2 audio elementary stream
>> (ISO 13818)" format HLS spec says means exactly, but apparently it is
>> just raw audio, right? Just checking I'm not missing someting useful here...
> for raw elementary streams there are no timestamps needed, i thought
> this was about ts, my mistake ...
>>>> since the pkt duration can't be
>>>> expressed exactly in MPEG timebase), so there will be a corresponding
>>>> jump in timestamps the next time a timestamped packet is output.
>>>> (this didn't happen with my original patch since I kept the offset
>>>> between last timestamp and current packet around in the audio timebase,
>>>> not MPEG timebase, converting the full offset each time so that rounding
>>>> error did not accumulate)
>>>> What should we do? Probably these are the reasonable options, unless you
>>>> think of something else:
>>>> a) Not care.
>>> thats a possible temporary solution
>>>> b) Add some artificial left-shift to all the timestamps in
>>>>    hls_id3_audio demuxer so that the rounding error will be negligible.
>>>> c) Make compute_pkt_fields() keep track of the rounding error and
>>>>    correct pkt duration and/or dts accordingly.
>>> i probably could look into this tomorrow if the timestamps are really
>>> that rare
>> OK, that'd be great. For now I'll go with not caring then.
>> BTW, just noticed something strange... When I have:
>> - one stream, with AVSTREAM_PARSE_FULL, and
>> - avformat_find_stream_info() done (by HLS demuxer),
>> and then do:
>> 1. Output first packet with DTS=X, containing multiple actual frames
>> => the AVPackets output from lavf get proper DTS = X, X+1, X+2
>> 2. Output second packet no DTS:
>> => now the AVPackets jump back to DTS = X, X+1, X+2
>> 3. Output third packet, no DTS:
>> => DTS continues correctly, X+3, X+4, X+5
>> And this jumping back only happens exactly once in the beginning of the
>> stream, everything is fine the next time a timestamped packet is output.
> do you have some testcase so i can reproduce this ?

I'll send an updated patchset very soon, with a reproducible testcase.

Anssi Hannula

More information about the ffmpeg-devel mailing list