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

[Paul B Mahol]

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.