> -----Original Message----- > From: libav-devel [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Mark > Thompson > Sent: Sunday, February 4, 2018 10:27 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [libav-devel] [PATCH 08/12] vf_hwupload/hwmap: Support setting a > fixed pool size > > On 30/01/18 05:34, wm4 wrote: > > On Mon, 29 Jan 2018 23:01:25 +0000 > > Mark Thompson <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> These filters do not directly know whether the API they are using will > >> support dynamic frame pools, so this is somewhat tricky. If the user > >> set extra_hw_frames, we assume that they are aware of the problem and > >> set a fixed size based on that. If not, most cases use dynamic sizing > >> just like they did previously. The hardware-reverse-mapping case for > >> hwmap previously had a large fixed size (64) here, primarily as a hack > >> for QSV use - this is removed and extra_hw_frames will need to be set > >> for QSV to work since it requires fixed-size pools (as the other cases > >> do, and which didn't work before). > >> --- > >> libavfilter/vf_hwmap.c | 7 ++++++- > >> libavfilter/vf_hwupload.c | 3 +++ > >> 2 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/libavfilter/vf_hwmap.c b/libavfilter/vf_hwmap.c > >> index b28cb2145..d5ad2768f 100644 > >> --- a/libavfilter/vf_hwmap.c > >> +++ b/libavfilter/vf_hwmap.c > >> @@ -138,7 +138,9 @@ static int hwmap_config_output(AVFilterLink *outlink) > >> frames->sw_format = hwfc->sw_format; > >> frames->width = hwfc->width; > >> frames->height = hwfc->height; > >> - frames->initial_pool_size = 64; > >> + > >> + if (avctx->extra_hw_frames >= 0) > >> + frames->initial_pool_size = 2 + avctx->extra_hw_frames; > >> > >> err = av_hwframe_ctx_init(ctx->hwframes_ref); > >> if (err < 0) { > >> @@ -218,6 +220,9 @@ static int hwmap_config_output(AVFilterLink *outlink) > >> hwfc->width = inlink->w; > >> hwfc->height = inlink->h; > >> > >> + if (avctx->extra_hw_frames >= 0) > >> + hwfc->initial_pool_size = 2 + avctx->extra_hw_frames; > >> + > >> err = av_hwframe_ctx_init(ctx->hwframes_ref); > >> if (err < 0) { > >> av_log(avctx, AV_LOG_ERROR, "Failed to create frame " > >> diff --git a/libavfilter/vf_hwupload.c b/libavfilter/vf_hwupload.c > >> index 8cca9f42e..af4ff9b81 100644 > >> --- a/libavfilter/vf_hwupload.c > >> +++ b/libavfilter/vf_hwupload.c > >> @@ -133,6 +133,9 @@ static int hwupload_config_output(AVFilterLink > *outlink) > >> ctx->hwframes->width = inlink->w; > >> ctx->hwframes->height = inlink->h; > >> > >> + if (avctx->extra_hw_frames >= 0) > >> + ctx->hwframes->initial_pool_size = 2 + avctx->extra_hw_frames; > >> + > >> err = av_hwframe_ctx_init(ctx->hwframes_ref); > >> if (err < 0) > >> goto fail; > > > > Should we have a hwcontext flag that informs the API user whether the > > frame pools require a fixed size? > > That would work for users, but I think you still need something for the > default > value in this particular case. > > Suppose the hwcontext definition also included a suggested default pool size - > that would allow libmfx to have a suggested size of 9001 for hwupload to work > with qsvenc while others can set more sensible values? I think before we figure out a more smart way to handle the buffer pool size, it sounds a practical way to allow different targets to set different suggested value. But I am not sure if there will be objection from the community.
I am also thinking about implementing on-demand buffer allocation for qsv. Is there anybody else ever think it over? Does is sound possible? Ruiling > > - Mark > _______________________________________________ > libav-devel mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.libav.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-devel _______________________________________________ libav-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.libav.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-devel
