Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Graphprint Patches Overview

From: "softworkz ." <softworkz-at-hotmail.com@ffmpeg.org>
To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches <ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org>
Cc: Kieran Kunhya <kieran618@googlemail.com>,
	"tc@ffmpeg.org" <tc@ffmpeg.org>
Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Graphprint Patches Overview
Date: Thu, 22 May 2025 08:13:12 +0000
Message-ID: <DM8P223MB03654B0F8D7689C2BC8A04C5BA99A@DM8P223MB0365.NAMP223.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CABGuwEmyXEwwaffsjmfyrEP23iPgEiK3kmkYONjX1q_rXgumRQ@mail.gmail.com>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ffmpeg-devel <ffmpeg-devel-bounces@ffmpeg.org> On Behalf Of Kieran
> Kunhya via ffmpeg-devel
> Sent: Donnerstag, 22. Mai 2025 09:22
> To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches <ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org>
> Cc: Kieran Kunhya <kieran618@googlemail.com>; tc@ffmpeg.org
> Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Graphprint Patches Overview
> 
> It's obvious basic testing was not done on this patchset seeing the scale
> of memory leaks.

Which scale are you talking about? Did you test it? How much memory growth
did you observe due to those leaks?

Did you test and compare with the submitted fixes? Are you still seeing any
leaks with those applied?

Which functionality is affected exactly? Under which conditions did you 
observe those leaks.

Did you identify any regressions in other FFmpeg functionality?

Which specific parts of the implementation need more work?

> I would like the TC to decide on reverting and proper resubmission later.
> 
> Kieran

Sure, I'm good with that.

But what you are requesting gives also testimony for that you don't even 
have the slightest clue about that patchset's contents, which somewhat 
disqualifies you for making such request. That's a bit funny, tbh.

Best regards
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".