[x264-devel] pic_struct / hrd patch

[Alex Giladi]

Klemen,
Thanks a lot for the fix!
Right now this breaks weighb, Jason already has a fix for that.
For the interlaced material, delta_poc_bottom should actually be -1 or
1 (as in the current version of the patch), depending on whether we
are dealing with tff or bff content.
The same lines are in the current v12 patch ( which will be posted
today or tomorrow ).
Alex (a.k.a. Zm_Gorynych)

On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 9:42 AM, Klemen Tusar <techouse at gmail.com> wrote:
> I fixed the patch so that it patches with r1352 but I dunno if that breaks
> something or not. Could one of you guys please review the 2 changes?
>
>
> $ diff x264-r1342-nal_hrd-pic_struct-v11.patch
> x264-r1352-nal_hrd-pic_struct-v11.patch
> 421c421
> < -        h->sh.i_delta_poc_bottom = 0;   /* XXX won't work for field */
> ---
>> -        h->sh.i_delta_poc_bottom = 0;
> 719c719
> < -    pps->b_pic_order = 0;
> ---
>> -    pps->b_pic_order = param->b_interlaced;
>
>
> The 1st change is trivial, since the issue was only a comment in a line, in
> the second one though a value changed in the original file so, dunno if that
> breaks anything or not.
>
>
>
> On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 4:57 AM, Alex Giladi <alex.giladi at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Attached is a new version of the patch.
>> This is a fix to the snafu detected by shon3i (on Doom9), where the
>> sizes/rates were assumed to be in units of 1024 bits, while they are
>> actually in 1000's.
>> Thanks to all the brave people who are using the patch and reporting
>> back the problems!
>> Alex (a.k.a. Zm_Gorynych on #x264dev).
>>
>> On Sat, Nov 21, 2009 at 2:48 AM, Alex Giladi <alex.giladi at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > Attached is a modified version (note: this is the same version as
>> > published in Doom9 today as http://pastebin.com/d72a44cf2).
>> > The patch has same functionality as the previous version, and has some
>> > parameter handling changes. Also, it removes 'panic factor' which was
>> > earlier applied to the HRD buffer parameters.
>> > Alex.
>> >
>> > On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 12:36 AM, Alex Giladi <alex.giladi at gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >> Attached is the fixed and updated version of the HRD patch.
>> >> Trahald was right (thanks!), and the VBV fullness routine was really
>> >> broken.
>> >> Alex.
>> >>
>> >> On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 8:45 AM, Trahald <wewk584 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>> I think your x264_vbv_fullness() routine is broken. initial cpb
>> >>> removal
>> >>> delay is holding negative values. it is what is causing elecard to
>> >>> reject
>> >>> the stream.
>> >>>
>> >>> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 10:34 AM, Alex Giladi <alex.giladi at gmail.com>
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Anyone that sees a problem with this patch -- can you please provide
>> >>>> some details?
>> >>>> Thanks!
>> >>>> Alex.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On Sun, Oct 11, 2009 at 3:31 PM, Jason Garrett-Glaser
>> >>>> <darkshikari at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>>> > On Wed, Oct 7, 2009 at 12:03 PM, Alex Giladi
>> >>>> > <alex.giladi at gmail.com>
>> >>>> > wrote:
>> >>>> >> Attached is the new version of the HRD patch with several changes
>> >>>> >> due
>> >>>> >> to the inputs from Dark_Shikari, Manao and Trahald.
>> >>>> >> The two major fixes cpb_removal_delay for IDR frames and
>> >>>> >> calculation
>> >>>> >> of initial_cpb_removal_delay.
>> >>>> >> Alex.
>> >
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> x264-devel mailing list
>> x264-devel at videolan.org
>> http://mailman.videolan.org/listinfo/x264-devel
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Lep pozdrav,
>
> Klemen Tušar
>
>
> http://djmemi.djslo-forum.com
> http://www.myspace.com/memidj
> http://www.midnightvibes.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> x264-devel mailing list
> x264-devel at videolan.org
> http://mailman.videolan.org/listinfo/x264-devel
>
>