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 ESMTPS id 3A7AE48276 for ; Mon, 20 Jan 2025 14:48:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.1.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ffbox0-bg.mplayerhq.hu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3573768B34C; Mon, 20 Jan 2025 16:48:16 +0200 (EET) Received: from nef.ens.fr (nef2.ens.fr [129.199.96.40]) by ffbox0-bg.mplayerhq.hu (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AF8AE688073 for ; Mon, 20 Jan 2025 16:48:09 +0200 (EET) X-ENS-nef-client: 129.199.129.80 ( name = phare.normalesup.org ) Received: from phare.normalesup.org (phare.normalesup.org [129.199.129.80]) by nef.ens.fr (8.14.4/1.01.28121999) with ESMTP id 50KEm9rM022954 for ; Mon, 20 Jan 2025 15:48:09 +0100 Received: by phare.normalesup.org (Postfix, from userid 1001) id F301C2EFE0; Mon, 20 Jan 2025 15:48:08 +0100 (CET) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2025 15:48:08 +0100 From: Nicolas George To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches Message-ID: References: <082f12b8-2319-47d2-8854-f361d2039748@gmail.com> <20250117170823.GM4991@pb2> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.4.3 (nef.ens.fr [129.199.96.32]); Mon, 20 Jan 2025 15:48:09 +0100 (CET) Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH v0] Implement promeg decoder. 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: Devin Heitmueller (12025-01-17): > It's an intrinsically difficult > problem. The data arrives on multiple sockets, leading to all sorts > of opportunities for timing behavior and reordering issues. I will add something on top of that: The architecture of network protocols in FFmpeg is not adapted to protocols with multiple sockets at all. All such protocols we have implement their own half-assed event loop. To implement anything complex would require reworking the whole system to have protocols and demuxers work in an input-driven fashion around a global event loop. With threads or contexts to let current output-driven code run, it would be doable. But with the current do-nothing-ambitious governance, and with the sequels of the botched move to threads of fftools, it cannot happen. > That said, I don't necessarily think we should let "perfect be the > enemy of good" and outright reject a proposed implementation that has > been reported to work in many use cases. Thank you for writing the obvious. > It's a good starting point and can be improved over time. Ditto. Regards, -- Nicolas George _______________________________________________ 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".