From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from ffbox0-bg.mplayerhq.hu (ffbox0-bg.ffmpeg.org [79.124.17.100]) by master.gitmailbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A2EF44C61A for ; Tue, 30 Jul 2024 20:16:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.1.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ffbox0-bg.mplayerhq.hu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8546168D849; Tue, 30 Jul 2024 23:16:51 +0300 (EEST) Received: from mail-ot1-f53.google.com (mail-ot1-f53.google.com [209.85.210.53]) by ffbox0-bg.mplayerhq.hu (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7716C68D7AF for ; Tue, 30 Jul 2024 23:16:45 +0300 (EEST) Received: by mail-ot1-f53.google.com with SMTP id 46e09a7af769-7093997dffdso1573525a34.2 for ; Tue, 30 Jul 2024 13:16:45 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1722370603; x=1722975403; darn=ffmpeg.org; h=to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version :from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=WWD3fW7dctEzmEF6GcncGUfnGsiS9BMCI4XbzeFCags=; b=luFuAzZFS8x91Ywzh2oivAqsXqqEH9AjASgGsuuwYuF97BDgvxyim63U8X4jcGiHeU tsZNGGZL+t/MTaa8K9EY1UYKQya34weoWNWWiKDI7x/jrE/jb0GNl/Fk6B/4mrcuiKXG p8bCncec6VNijZ3ma8dK000AjEdrlxZOhqzN/yx24vkP/XWtRweEO2lyUq+dgEPxiWLx dE9SC0EbjdEKgZGP+pC8Isq+tPcFahxpyZt0jmmsoDhLy0E5iluOWQFwFocgGtsuf/et 1Cddj5rnfDdejj/H8WrVB9LWiJrlqqvde2xubk350NzolGBvPDM6PMTDfBa57slREeG8 0cqw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1722370603; x=1722975403; h=to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=WWD3fW7dctEzmEF6GcncGUfnGsiS9BMCI4XbzeFCags=; b=LeReOeoqQPxbaUrfTi8trxROGZEdBEnfWinUM1Zh/amWi8YNVQ1N0pb7kKtotvJVv1 hwFad5IQoTKzUvA9NEWjfmH5FAxa/DOAJcX5gy5zFUTq16csaQnCYeX1A2FqbROiOw71 nZ98YvNyMajKmzRuA66N73dzVucLvRl0t6euYCzajcw0GJjDkv+9qUnMDk3U69vPWzWg LLMcZ+RLYTclYW4dSxBUCsAF8xAsvZ6i0xnhMHHz2ps9Uva2Bw63H6zkSvdNGyP6HgEL DWrZc/7yUmX36wsF6EvU8AVKA7SBfZfvIUZ6LYFwfIyW80Fpt4Z0g5JqXZ3VbnssM0mc RXIg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YxgD9rHqYPN9w/owuRdkh1V2Va1LVKWD/CH9eusgTnELxKxIMD+ VaICL+zsaSpJZ5FQYZC7CKxEUKEQoRvWmn9JvD5LQqrcecNLKhqkcDnQLm+pir/w6GjGgi++LhA H4ZG2PyEYqHWsYEzGvwldT6PeddN8WQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IGZsPmsSf2WoEmYPF7qaCyxAU3qgMmZS7t7IVNquJioFF0jjzER89liLCBCE0haPL95SrwTy/AE5H7lhihgdVU= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6871:5207:b0:261:1b0f:dc94 with SMTP id 586e51a60fabf-267d4f3b525mr14181131fac.45.1722370603369; Tue, 30 Jul 2024 13:16:43 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20240709190547.99246-1-joshua.allmann@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: From: Josh Allmann Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2024 13:16:06 -0700 Message-ID: To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] avcodec/h264_mp4toannexb: Prepend SPS/PPS to buffering period SEI X-BeenThere: ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: FFmpeg development discussions and patches List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: ffmpeg-devel-bounces@ffmpeg.org Sender: "ffmpeg-devel" Archived-At: List-Archive: List-Post: On Mon, 22 Jul 2024 at 17:17, Timo Rothenpieler wrote: > > On 23/07/2024 01:01, Josh Allmann wrote: > > On Tue, 9 Jul 2024 at 12:06, Josh Allmann wrote: > >> > >> Encoders may emit a buffering period SEI without a corresponding > >> SPS/PPS if the SPS/PPS is carried out-of-band, eg with avcc. > >> > >> During Annex B conversion, this may result in the SPS/PPS being > >> inserted *after* the buffering period SEI but before the IDR NAL. > >> > >> Since the buffering period SEI references the SPS, the SPS/PPS > >> needs to come first. > >> --- > >> > >> Notes: > >> v2: Updated FATE test refs > >> > >> libavcodec/bsf/h264_mp4toannexb.c | 13 +++++++++++++ > >> tests/ref/fate/h264-bsf-mp4toannexb | 2 +- > >> tests/ref/fate/h264_mp4toannexb_ticket2991 | 18 +++++++++--------- > >> tests/ref/fate/segment-mp4-to-ts | 12 ++++++------ > >> 4 files changed, 29 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-) > >> > > > > Ping again for review. Looking at the FATE output, this patch fixes a number > > of things - see [1] for details > > patch generally looks good to me, but I'm not closely familiar with the > code there. > Thanks, is there anyone else more familiar with the code who can also sign off on this patch? Josh _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email ffmpeg-devel-request@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".