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 92C19432B0 for ; Sat, 28 May 2022 08:47:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.1.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ffbox0-bg.mplayerhq.hu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1992F68B588; Sat, 28 May 2022 11:47:40 +0300 (EEST) Received: from mail-yb1-f176.google.com (mail-yb1-f176.google.com [209.85.219.176]) by ffbox0-bg.mplayerhq.hu (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DE37568B191 for ; Sat, 28 May 2022 11:47:33 +0300 (EEST) Received: by mail-yb1-f176.google.com with SMTP id z7so11426061ybf.7 for ; Sat, 28 May 2022 01:47:33 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=xOx9TK9nkF7yv8ylGWohw0oNoc+ZSfXGVtkpaBngVRU=; b=QjYMn3cKDS8s2IZJpNlxsUeYlb/t2jHus48uopEpRHKp1J0MsUVdBL13SL6ECspFbu s7WukQ3/6w5xTX77LLITrZb/tM5sHRsoPncukr3/yKm/KMCT7qnNyIUYXOOhPSILohYQ zitbjMvT71R216/Wf05HApOYTIKuHVQmHfL6/gcbcDRWq45F/U3ruk4tzlNtIYHWzyau 4PPytlvRxY13HECts5PCeF1fK8Ocy6Y/Z1nQ7QDOtxmICl1T3SiUM2J46gFImwfw6xHb fPj44cE5NNYfE+mRl89Mq3r7vZ2xwFzJx4IlZrLS7aS5v38C8wboHe/IKfYVQHmEG+DR jX4w== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=xOx9TK9nkF7yv8ylGWohw0oNoc+ZSfXGVtkpaBngVRU=; b=frwOWZNGugkQmy+JN36GpnRxufZgayHUIDPzb7WzP4STWv/OoqV2+inAn1TlWAN+EJ lFOTTHZorpQLgB2lrKB6OUJaTPAOgThaH6z+TR0WxKWaq5gsQF9Uu68DavORRa8Ibqbw 7zNxZtOPJbBP5REDAh+xLnGUOkN4pNEIuG6KEDS2MWZfzVp85xdw8JCQ0R737TatBwwv ThREVpgjuhEz5qYqEM3Jfdm/KGKWz257OeJ+s0asBHYDvLHU05YNqiKIAbQ/87ytwAg1 X2OnD6wwXyCE7Ab1mXSE5oHP6hANp9+WQA8l8OlSNoxIA50FYk6SE0r/ka/vQTGjddjl N2Kw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533hV3ENNQlonYO66oLvJNf/oJyeMGI4XGZcFNCEK4dCMaIHKSCC /8hceoY1UCp0vyRy4ljnbcUT2bjVWpsomkcbpEf0VliC X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxxeTfGhvsLo1AId65lQi31lR/6mVnjwge148bb6zjxFqhG2BiPADnbceIJxY6TeekwtQlGy7+SRW3jMiWJ9IQ= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6902:1022:b0:64e:b3ae:f252 with SMTP id x2-20020a056902102200b0064eb3aef252mr45225855ybt.142.1653727652518; Sat, 28 May 2022 01:47:32 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Paul B Mahol Date: Sat, 28 May 2022 10:50:20 +0200 Message-ID: To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.29 Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] FATE Errors 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 Sat, May 28, 2022 at 10:41 AM Soft Works wrote: > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: ffmpeg-devel On Behalf Of > > Paul B Mahol > > Sent: Saturday, May 28, 2022 10:33 AM > > To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches > devel@ffmpeg.org> > > Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] FATE Errors > > > > On Sat, May 28, 2022 at 10:12 AM Soft Works > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: ffmpeg-devel On Behalf Of > > > > Paul B Mahol > > > > Sent: Saturday, May 28, 2022 10:04 AM > > > > To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches > > > devel@ffmpeg.org> > > > > Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] FATE Errors > > > > > > > > On Sat, May 28, 2022 at 9:47 AM Soft Works > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > From: ffmpeg-devel On > > Behalf Of > > > > > > Paul B Mahol > > > > > > Sent: Saturday, May 28, 2022 9:35 AM > > > > > > To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches > > > > > devel@ffmpeg.org> > > > > > > Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] FATE Errors > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, May 28, 2022 at 9:26 AM Soft Works > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > From: ffmpeg-devel On > > > > Behalf Of > > > > > > > > Paul B Mahol > > > > > > > > Sent: Saturday, May 28, 2022 9:26 AM > > > > > > > > To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches > > > > > > > devel@ffmpeg.org> > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] FATE Errors > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, May 27, 2022 at 11:11 PM Soft Works > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > > > From: ffmpeg-devel > > On > > > > > > Behalf Of > > > > > > > > > > Andreas Rheinhardt > > > > > > > > > > Sent: Saturday, April 30, 2022 10:02 PM > > > > > > > > > > To: ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org > > > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] FATE Errors > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > James Almer: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 4/30/2022 4:06 PM, Andreas Rheinhardt wrote: > > > > > > > > > > >> Soft Works: > > > > > > > > > > >>> Hi, > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > >>> is it a known issue that the current head of the > > > > master > > > > > > > > branch > > > > > > > > > > has > > > > > > > > > > >>> FATE errors? > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > >>> I get the same locally as well as on the > > automated > > > > GitHub > > > > > > > > build. > > > > > > > > > > >>> One is this: > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > >>> --- ./tests/ref/vsynth/vsynth2-mpeg2-422 2022-04- > > 30 > > > > > > > > > > >>> 14:23:44.330424058 +0000 > > > > > > > > > > >>> +++ tests/data/fate/vsynth2-mpeg2-422 2022-04-30 > > > > > > > > > > 14:38:41.071678201 > > > > > > > > > > >>> +0000 > > > > > > > > > > >>> @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@ > > > > > > > > > > >>> -b2fa9b73c3547191ecc01b8163abd4e5 > > > > > > > > > > >>> *tests/data/fate/vsynth2-mpeg2-422.mpeg2video > > > > > > > > > > >>> -379164 tests/data/fate/vsynth2-mpeg2- > > 422.mpeg2video > > > > > > > > > > >>> -704f6a96f93c2409219bd48b74169041 > > > > > > > > > > >>> *tests/data/fate/vsynth2-mpeg2-422.out.rawvideo > > > > > > > > > > >>> -stddev: 4.17 PSNR: 35.73 MAXDIFF: 70 bytes: > > 7603200/ > > > > > > 7603200 > > > > > > > > > > >>> +8f6d565723ccf879ab2b5aa910b7ce21 > > > > > > > > > > >>> *tests/data/fate/vsynth2-mpeg2-422.mpeg2video > > > > > > > > > > >>> +380544 tests/data/fate/vsynth2-mpeg2- > > 422.mpeg2video > > > > > > > > > > >>> +0797fddea4835687dedddebbbe98fa8f > > > > > > > > > > >>> *tests/data/fate/vsynth2-mpeg2-422.out.rawvideo > > > > > > > > > > >>> +stddev: 4.16 PSNR: 35.73 MAXDIFF: 75 bytes: > > 7603200/ > > > > > > 7603200 > > > > > > > > > > >>> Test vsynth2-mpeg2-422 failed. Look at > > > > > > > > > > >>> tests/data/fate/vsynth2-mpeg2-422.err for > > details. > > > > > > > > > > >>> make: *** [tests/Makefile:277: fate-vsynth2- > > mpeg2- > > > > 422] > > > > > > Error > > > > > > > > 1 > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > >>> Is anybody seeing the same? > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > >>> Thanks, > > > > > > > > > > >>> sw > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> http://fate.ffmpeg.org/ doesn't show recent > > > > regressions > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > FATE > > > > > > > > > > is fine > > > > > > > > > > >> for me locally. I recently made changes to FATE > > > > (namely > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > test > > > > > > > > > > >> requirements, vcodec.mak (where the vsynth-tests > > > > reside) > > > > > > among > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > files > > > > > > > > > > >> affected), so I am interested in whether the > > failing > > > > tests > > > > > > are > > > > > > > > > > >> concentrated on the files recently changed by me > > (it > > > > would > > > > > > > > > > obviously not > > > > > > > > > > >> haved pushed them if I knew them to cause issues; > > also > > > > > > > > patchwork > > > > > > > > > > was > > > > > > > > > > >> fine). > > > > > > > > > > >> Are these issues reproducible? Can you bisect > > them? > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> - Andreas > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This may be the alignment issue introduced in lavfi > > in > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://git.videolan.org/?p=ffmpeg.git;a=commitdiff;h=17a59a634c39b00 > > > > > > > > > > a680c6ebbaea58db95594d13d > > > > > > > > > > > assuming it was not fixed. > > > > > > > > > > > I think it only affected targets where > > > > av_cpu_max_align() > > > > > > > > returned > > > > > > > > > > 64. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You are completely right: Just making > > av_cpu_max_align > > > > return > > > > > > 64 > > > > > > > > > > allows > > > > > > > > > > to reproduce the issue. And it has nothing to do with > > my > > > > > > recent > > > > > > > > FATE > > > > > > > > > > patches (545e87f49dc9fa5b880e330fc4e1854df68cc0f1 > > would > > > > be > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > contender for changes). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I found that the FATE errors can be avoided by using > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ./configure --disable-avx512 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yet, I hope it will be fixed at some time.. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I hope you will post a fix for it soon. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That depends on whether we want alignment values > 32bit..? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nope, its about mpeg video encoder in lavc that does funny > > things > > > > > > from old > > > > > > days when linesize alignment was hardcoded. > > > > > > > > > > Adding this > > > > > > > > > > align = FFMIN(align, 32); > > > > > > > > > > to ff_default_get_video_buffer2() resolves the issue. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Maybe it resolves it for you but that does not mean in any way > > that > > > > that is > > > > valid or correct solution. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That's why I had written: > > > > > > > > > > > That depends on whether we want alignment values > 32bit..? > > > > > > > > > > > > > 32bit is 4 integers. so I failed to follow whatever you tried to > > > > communicate. > > > > > > Sorry for being unclear. What I meant to ask is this: > > > > > > In cases where av_cpu_max_align() returns something > 32 - for > > > example 64, do we have to use that max-align value of 64 for > > alignment > > > in video.c and framepool,c or could we just limit this to 32? > > > (hence the FFMIN). > > > > > > Limiting the alignment to 32 appears to fix the issue, meaning that > > > the three fate tests mentioned above are producing the expected ref > > > output and don't fail anymore. > > > > > > > That is hack. > > Only when 64bit alignment would be required or beneficial in terms of > performance (e.g. AVX512 operations). AVX512 operations are not using 64bit alignment. > > Which is the reason for my question. If yes, then this would be > surely a bad idea. > It is not Yes/No answer here. > > sw > _______________________________________________ > 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". > _______________________________________________ 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".