[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] fate: use an even more exotic channel layout mov-mp4-pcm-float test

[Marton Balint]

On Sun, 18 Feb 2024, James Almer wrote:

> On 2/18/2024 7:45 AM, Marton Balint wrote:
>>  The old layout happened to be a native layout and therefore missed some
>>  recently fixed layout parsing bugs.
>>
>>  Signed-off-by: Marton Balint <cus at passwd.hu>
>>  ---
>>    tests/fate/mov.mak               | 2 +-
>>    tests/ref/fate/mov-mp4-pcm-float | 4 ++--
>>    2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>
>>  diff --git a/tests/fate/mov.mak b/tests/fate/mov.mak
>>  index 4850c8aa94..8d154c8b5b 100644
>>  --- a/tests/fate/mov.mak
>>  +++ b/tests/fate/mov.mak
>>  @@ -187,7 +187,7 @@ fate-mov-mp4-pcm: CMD = transcode wav
>>  $(TARGET_PATH)/tests/data/asynth-44100-1.w
>>    FATE_MOV_FFMPEG-$(call TRANSCODE, PCM_S16LE, MOV, WAV_DEMUXER
>>    PAN_FILTER) \
>>                              += fate-mov-mp4-pcm-float
>>    fate-mov-mp4-pcm-float: tests/data/asynth-44100-1.wav
>>  -fate-mov-mp4-pcm-float: CMD = transcode wav
>>  $(TARGET_PATH)/tests/data/asynth-44100-1.wav mp4 "-af
>>  aresample,pan=FL+LFE+BR|c0=c0|c1=c0|c2=c0 -c:a pcm_f32le" "-map 0 -c copy
>>  -frames:a 0"
>>  +fate-mov-mp4-pcm-float: CMD = transcode wav
>>  $(TARGET_PATH)/tests/data/asynth-44100-1.wav mp4 "-af
>>  aresample,pan=FR+FL+FR|c0=c0|c1=c0|c2=c0 -c:a pcm_f32le" "-map 0 -c copy
>>  -frames:a 0"
>
> Wouldn't FR+FL+LFE be enough to test this? While also generating a file 
> that's realistic.

It depends on what you want to test. With the old code, for FR+FL+LFE,
only the channel order would have been wrong, with FR+FL+FR also the 
channel count.

Having the same channel position in the same track is not that 
theoretical, at least for MOV I have samples where an additional FR/FL 
track is used for Music/Effects. I admit, for MP4 that might be less 
common though, and I also admit that using a separate track for it would 
be better. But as we know, nothing is ideal in practice...

Nevertheless, I can change the test to FR+FL+LFE if that is preferred.

Regards,
Marton