[FFmpeg-devel] Graphprint Patches Overview

[FFmpeg-devel] Graphprint Patches Overview

[softworkz .]

Hello,

thanks again to all for the patches. I figured it might be a bit difficult to
keep track of what has already been submitted and fixed and is still
pending, and I'm sorry that there has been some duplicate effort to fix the
same things - so here's an overview. The ones with X are the ones I would
like to apply eventually:


Timo Rothenpieler
https://patchwork.ffmpeg.org/project/ffmpeg/list/?series=14528 
(I would favor "ffbuild/commonmak" over for 1/3)

  [1/3] fftools/resources: fix preservation of intermediary resman build artifacts
X [2/3] ffbuild: correctly silence and tag new css/html steps
X [3/3] fftools/resources: add missing extensions to .gitignore



Mark Thompson (already merged)
https://patchwork.ffmpeg.org/project/ffmpeg/list/?series=14537 

X [1/3] ffmpeg: Don't print graphs if there are no graphs to print
X [2/3] fftools/graphprint: Fix leak of graphprint object
X [3/3] fftools/graphprint: Fix leak of graph section header string


softworkz
https://patchwork.ffmpeg.org/project/ffmpeg/list/?series=14563

X [1/5] fftools/makefile: Remove resources from ffprobe
X [2/5] fftools/resources: Use .SECONDARY in Makefile comment
X [3/5] fftools/ffmpeg: Free print_graph option variables
X [4/5] fftools/graphprint: Fix memory leaks
X [5/5] fftools/tf_mermaid: Add missing uninit and fix leaks

https://patchwork.ffmpeg.org/project/ffmpeg/list/?series=14570 
X [v3] ffbuild/commonmak: Fix rebuild check with implicit rule chains


Derek Buitenhuis
https://patchwork.ffmpeg.org/project/ffmpeg/list/?series=14569
(1/3 and 2/3 correspond to 2/3 from Timo, and 3/3 doesn't fix
the rebuild check like "commonmak" above does)

[1/3] ffbuild/common: Remove what appears to be a temporary debugging comment
[2/3] ffbuild/common: Properly tag/suppress sed command
[3/3] fftools/resoirces: Mark .css.min and .css.min.gz as NOTINTERMEDIATE


Thanks again,
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".

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Graphprint Patches Overview

[Kieran Kunhya via ffmpeg-devel]

On Wed, 21 May 2025, 01:45 softworkz ., <softworkz-at-hotmail.com@ffmpeg.org>
wrote:

> Hello,
>
> thanks again to all for the patches. I figured it might be a bit difficult
> to
> keep track of what has already been submitted and fixed and is still
> pending, and I'm sorry that there has been some duplicate effort to fix the
> same things - so here's an overview. The ones with X are the ones I would
> like to apply eventually:
>
>
> Timo Rothenpieler
> https://patchwork.ffmpeg.org/project/ffmpeg/list/?series=14528
> (I would favor "ffbuild/commonmak" over for 1/3)
>
>   [1/3] fftools/resources: fix preservation of intermediary resman build
> artifacts
> X [2/3] ffbuild: correctly silence and tag new css/html steps
> X [3/3] fftools/resources: add missing extensions to .gitignore
>
>
>
> Mark Thompson (already merged)
> https://patchwork.ffmpeg.org/project/ffmpeg/list/?series=14537
>
> X [1/3] ffmpeg: Don't print graphs if there are no graphs to print
> X [2/3] fftools/graphprint: Fix leak of graphprint object
> X [3/3] fftools/graphprint: Fix leak of graph section header string
>
>
> softworkz
> https://patchwork.ffmpeg.org/project/ffmpeg/list/?series=14563
>
> X [1/5] fftools/makefile: Remove resources from ffprobe
> X [2/5] fftools/resources: Use .SECONDARY in Makefile comment
> X [3/5] fftools/ffmpeg: Free print_graph option variables
> X [4/5] fftools/graphprint: Fix memory leaks
> X [5/5] fftools/tf_mermaid: Add missing uninit and fix leaks
>
> https://patchwork.ffmpeg.org/project/ffmpeg/list/?series=14570
> X [v3] ffbuild/commonmak: Fix rebuild check with implicit rule chains
>
>
> Derek Buitenhuis
> https://patchwork.ffmpeg.org/project/ffmpeg/list/?series=14569
> (1/3 and 2/3 correspond to 2/3 from Timo, and 3/3 doesn't fix
> the rebuild check like "commonmak" above does)
>
> [1/3] ffbuild/common: Remove what appears to be a temporary debugging
> comment
> [2/3] ffbuild/common: Properly tag/suppress sed command
> [3/3] fftools/resoirces: Mark .css.min and .css.min.gz as NOTINTERMEDIATE
>
>
> Thanks again,
> sw
>

Can we just revert the whole set until it's cleaned up properly?

There are more patches to fix issues than the set itself. This is
understandable if it's a bit architectural change like threading but it's
not.

Kieran

>
_______________________________________________
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".

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Graphprint Patches Overview

[softworkz .]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ffmpeg-devel <ffmpeg-devel-bounces@ffmpeg.org> On Behalf Of Kieran
> Kunhya via ffmpeg-devel
> Sent: Mittwoch, 21. Mai 2025 13:00
> To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches <ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org>
> Cc: Kieran Kunhya <kieran618@googlemail.com>
> Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Graphprint Patches Overview
> 
> On Wed, 21 May 2025, 01:45 softworkz ., <softworkz-at-hotmail.com@ffmpeg.org>
> wrote:
> 
> > Hello,
> >
> > thanks again to all for the patches. I figured it might be a bit difficult
> > to
> > keep track of what has already been submitted and fixed and is still
> > pending, and I'm sorry that there has been some duplicate effort to fix the
> > same things - so here's an overview. The ones with X are the ones I would
> > like to apply eventually:
> >
> >
> > Timo Rothenpieler
> > https://patchwork.ffmpeg.org/project/ffmpeg/list/?series=14528
> > (I would favor "ffbuild/commonmak" over for 1/3)
> >
> >   [1/3] fftools/resources: fix preservation of intermediary resman build
> > artifacts
> > X [2/3] ffbuild: correctly silence and tag new css/html steps
> > X [3/3] fftools/resources: add missing extensions to .gitignore
> >
> >
> >
> > Mark Thompson (already merged)
> > https://patchwork.ffmpeg.org/project/ffmpeg/list/?series=14537
> >
> > X [1/3] ffmpeg: Don't print graphs if there are no graphs to print
> > X [2/3] fftools/graphprint: Fix leak of graphprint object
> > X [3/3] fftools/graphprint: Fix leak of graph section header string
> >
> >
> > softworkz
> > https://patchwork.ffmpeg.org/project/ffmpeg/list/?series=14563
> >
> > X [1/5] fftools/makefile: Remove resources from ffprobe
> > X [2/5] fftools/resources: Use .SECONDARY in Makefile comment
> > X [3/5] fftools/ffmpeg: Free print_graph option variables
> > X [4/5] fftools/graphprint: Fix memory leaks
> > X [5/5] fftools/tf_mermaid: Add missing uninit and fix leaks
> >
> > https://patchwork.ffmpeg.org/project/ffmpeg/list/?series=14570
> > X [v3] ffbuild/commonmak: Fix rebuild check with implicit rule chains
> >
> >
> > Derek Buitenhuis
> > https://patchwork.ffmpeg.org/project/ffmpeg/list/?series=14569
> > (1/3 and 2/3 correspond to 2/3 from Timo, and 3/3 doesn't fix
> > the rebuild check like "commonmak" above does)
> >
> > [1/3] ffbuild/common: Remove what appears to be a temporary debugging
> > comment
> > [2/3] ffbuild/common: Properly tag/suppress sed command
> > [3/3] fftools/resoirces: Mark .css.min and .css.min.gz as NOTINTERMEDIATE
> >
> >
> > Thanks again,
> > sw
> >
> 
> Can we just revert the whole set until it's cleaned up properly?

So that it can be ignored for another 15 revisions?
I'm glad and thankful that others have looked at it now and I don't expect
so many more things to come.

> There are more patches to fix issues than the set itself. This is
> understandable if it's a bit architectural change like threading but it's
> not.

Please note that many of those patches are just single-line changes and
the "more fixes than patches" is not that unusual. It's only less visible
because nobody normally sends an overview like I did. Even though it's
not an architectural change, it's still an entirely new feature with 2k
lines of new code (counting the last 4 commits only).

I really would have preferred this to have happened while the patches 
were submitted for review and I don't know why nobody had responded to 
my messages asking whether somebody would still like to review it and 
would need more time. I would have happily waited longer - even weeks,
if someone had said anything.

Finally, for a "better picture", I could have excluded the patches from
Mark (already merged) and Derek (duplicate), but I still listed them
to acknowledge their efforts.

Best,
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".

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Graphprint Patches Overview

[Kyle Swanson]

Hi,

On Wed, May 21, 2025 at 4:00 AM Kieran Kunhya via ffmpeg-devel
<ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org> wrote:
> Can we just revert the whole set until it's cleaned up properly?
>
> There are more patches to fix issues than the set itself. This is
> understandable if it's a bit architectural change like threading but it's
> not.

I agree with Kieran, revert. This was not ready to be pushed IMO.

Thanks,
Kyle
_______________________________________________
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".

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Graphprint Patches Overview

[softworkz .]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ffmpeg-devel <ffmpeg-devel-bounces@ffmpeg.org> On Behalf Of Kyle Swanson
> Sent: Mittwoch, 21. Mai 2025 22:11
> To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches <ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org>
> Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Graphprint Patches Overview
> 
> Hi,
> 
> On Wed, May 21, 2025 at 4:00 AM Kieran Kunhya via ffmpeg-devel
> <ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org> wrote:
> > Can we just revert the whole set until it's cleaned up properly?
> >
> > There are more patches to fix issues than the set itself. This is
> > understandable if it's a bit architectural change like threading but it's
> > not.
> 
> I agree with Kieran, revert. This was not ready to be pushed IMO.
> 
> Thanks,
> Kyle
> _______________________________________________

I think the least that can be expected from somebody making such a 
request is that they provide specific reasoning after having taken 
a closer look - which the two of you apparently haven't.

Thanks
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".

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Graphprint Patches Overview

[softworkz .]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ffmpeg-devel <ffmpeg-devel-bounces@ffmpeg.org> On Behalf Of softworkz .
> Sent: Mittwoch, 21. Mai 2025 22:20
> To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches <ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org>
> Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Graphprint Patches Overview
> 
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ffmpeg-devel <ffmpeg-devel-bounces@ffmpeg.org> On Behalf Of Kyle
> Swanson
> > Sent: Mittwoch, 21. Mai 2025 22:11
> > To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches <ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org>
> > Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Graphprint Patches Overview
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Wed, May 21, 2025 at 4:00 AM Kieran Kunhya via ffmpeg-devel
> > <ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org> wrote:
> > > Can we just revert the whole set until it's cleaned up properly?
> > >
> > > There are more patches to fix issues than the set itself. This is
> > > understandable if it's a bit architectural change like threading but it's
> > > not.
> >
> > I agree with Kieran, revert. This was not ready to be pushed IMO.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Kyle
> > _______________________________________________
> 
> I think the least that can be expected from somebody making such a
> request is that they provide specific reasoning after having taken
> a closer look - which the two of you apparently haven't.
> 
> Thanks
> sw
> 
> _______________________________________________

Here's a branch with the pending fixes included:

https://github.com/softworkz/FFmpeg/tree/submit_graphprint_allfixes

Please explain specifically what you want to have reverted and why.

Thanks
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".

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Graphprint Patches Overview

[Kieran Kunhya via ffmpeg-devel]

It's obvious basic testing was not done on this patchset seeing the scale
of memory leaks.

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

Kieran

On Wed, 21 May 2025, 21:37 softworkz ., <softworkz-at-hotmail.com@ffmpeg.org>
wrote:

>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ffmpeg-devel <ffmpeg-devel-bounces@ffmpeg.org> On Behalf Of
> softworkz .
> > Sent: Mittwoch, 21. Mai 2025 22:20
> > To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches <ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org>
> > Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Graphprint Patches Overview
> >
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: ffmpeg-devel <ffmpeg-devel-bounces@ffmpeg.org> On Behalf Of Kyle
> > Swanson
> > > Sent: Mittwoch, 21. Mai 2025 22:11
> > > To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches <
> ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org>
> > > Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Graphprint Patches Overview
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > On Wed, May 21, 2025 at 4:00 AM Kieran Kunhya via ffmpeg-devel
> > > <ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org> wrote:
> > > > Can we just revert the whole set until it's cleaned up properly?
> > > >
> > > > There are more patches to fix issues than the set itself. This is
> > > > understandable if it's a bit architectural change like threading but
> it's
> > > > not.
> > >
> > > I agree with Kieran, revert. This was not ready to be pushed IMO.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Kyle
> > > _______________________________________________
> >
> > I think the least that can be expected from somebody making such a
> > request is that they provide specific reasoning after having taken
> > a closer look - which the two of you apparently haven't.
> >
> > Thanks
> > sw
> >
> > _______________________________________________
>
> Here's a branch with the pending fixes included:
>
> https://github.com/softworkz/FFmpeg/tree/submit_graphprint_allfixes
>
> Please explain specifically what you want to have reverted and why.
>
> Thanks
> 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".

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Graphprint Patches Overview

[softworkz .]

> -----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".

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Graphprint Patches Overview

[softworkz .]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ffmpeg-devel <ffmpeg-devel-bounces@ffmpeg.org> On Behalf Of softworkz .
> Sent: Donnerstag, 22. Mai 2025 10:13
> 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
> 
> 
> 
> > -----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.
> 
> _______________________________________________

The reason why I'm saying that is because if somebody would have looked
a bit at the patchset and the history over those 15 revisions, then they
would have realized that 10 of the patches have been actively reviewed
(*) two are trivial (T) and for the remain 2 patches, I had no other
choice than to assume they have been seen.

That's why I think that it's kind of a joke when someone asks to 
revert the whole patchset. 


*  1:  Formatting and whitespace changes
*  2:  Apply quality improvements
*  3:  Remove unused print_rational() pointer from 
*  4:  Rename name param to key for API consistency
*  5:  Re-use BPrint in loop  
*  6:  Introduce AVTextFormatOptions for avtext_context_open()
*  7:  Introduce common header and deduplicate code
*  8:  Use av_default_item_name
*  9:  Add flags param to function avtext_print_integer()
* 10:  Move some declaration to new header file
T 11:  Add avfilter_link_get_hw_frames_ctx()
  12:  Add resource manager files with build-time compression
T 13:  Make ms_from_ost() inline
  14:  Add execution graph printing

All fixes were targeting 14 only (and the Makefile from 12).
Looking just a tiny bit at the subject would have made this
clear.

In turn, anybody asking to revert "the patchset" is implicitly
admitting that he doesn't have the slightest idea about what
he's talking.

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".

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Graphprint Patches Overview

[Nicolas George]

Kieran Kunhya via ffmpeg-devel (HE12025-05-22):
> It's obvious basic testing was not done on this patchset seeing the scale
> of memory leaks.
> 
> I would like the TC to decide on reverting and proper resubmission later.

For once, I agree with that assessment. I think giving softworkz the
authority to decide if his own patches are ready for inclusion was
premature.

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".

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Graphprint Patches Overview

[softworkz .]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ffmpeg-devel <ffmpeg-devel-bounces@ffmpeg.org> On Behalf Of Nicolas
> George
> Sent: Donnerstag, 22. Mai 2025 10:50
> To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches <ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org>
> Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Graphprint Patches Overview
> 
> Kieran Kunhya via ffmpeg-devel (HE12025-05-22):
> > It's obvious basic testing was not done on this patchset seeing the scale
> > of memory leaks.
> >
> > I would like the TC to decide on reverting and proper resubmission later.
> 
> For once, I agree with that assessment. I think giving softworkz the
> authority to decide if his own patches are ready for inclusion was
> premature.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> --

I precisely followed the instructions I was given.

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".

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Graphprint Patches Overview

[softworkz .]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ffmpeg-devel <ffmpeg-devel-bounces@ffmpeg.org> On Behalf Of Nicolas
> George
> Sent: Donnerstag, 22. Mai 2025 10:50
> To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches <ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org>
> Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Graphprint Patches Overview
> 
> Kieran Kunhya via ffmpeg-devel (HE12025-05-22):
> > It's obvious basic testing was not done on this patchset seeing the scale
> > of memory leaks.
> >
> > I would like the TC to decide on reverting and proper resubmission later.
> 
> For once, I agree with that assessment. I think giving softworkz the
> authority to decide if his own patches are ready for inclusion was
> premature.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> --
>   Nicolas George


And why didn't you review it actually? You have definitely followed the
progress - more than anybody else and made a lot of comments.

That's why I also took it for granted that you've seen it.

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".

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Graphprint Patches Overview

[softworkz .]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ffmpeg-devel <ffmpeg-devel-bounces@ffmpeg.org> On Behalf Of Nicolas
> George
> Sent: Donnerstag, 22. Mai 2025 10:50
> To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches <ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org>
> Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Graphprint Patches Overview
> 
> Kieran Kunhya via ffmpeg-devel (HE12025-05-22):
> > It's obvious basic testing was not done on this patchset seeing the scale
> > of memory leaks.
> >
> > I would like the TC to decide on reverting and proper resubmission later.
> 
> For once, I agree with that assessment. I think giving softworkz the
> authority to decide if his own patches are ready for inclusion was
> premature.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> --
>   Nicolas George
> _______________________________________________


For background and aftermath, please read: The "bad" Patch

https://lists.ffmpeg.org/pipermail/ffmpeg-devel/2025-May/344274.html

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".

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Graphprint Patches Overview

[Michael Niedermayer]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2173 bytes --]

Hi Kieran

On Thu, May 22, 2025 at 08:21:48AM +0100, Kieran Kunhya via ffmpeg-devel wrote:
> It's obvious basic testing was not done on this patchset seeing the scale
> of memory leaks.
> 
> I would like the TC to decide on reverting and proper resubmission later.

Iam not speaking for the TC here

1. The graphprint code was on the ML for a month and resumbitted for review
    12 times, basically noone reviewed it (going back to that will not help it)
2. The graphprint code is very actively worked on (thats normal and good
    and what git master is for and thats how it improves quickly)
3. The statement that the graphprint code wasnt tested is obviously false
    softworkz tested it. I tested at least build on multiply platforms
4. "seeing the scale of memory leaks." try to compare this to
   IAMF "git log --grep IAMF --oneline", IAMF is after a year still receiving
   frequent security fixes. This is just as a comparission

What you are doing is trying to gain from somewhat popular oppinions
at the expense of the project and team.

many disliked the "opening of a browser" and thats now resolved
and reverted, but instead of letting the wounds heal you throw salt in them.
And while people are working and improving the code you push another
round of animosity

I dont really care if the code is all reverted or not. (it seems though
wiser to let people work on it as they already do)
What i do not agree with is this seeding of animosity you do.

This very much reminds me of
Simple Sabotage Field Manual
https://www.cia.gov/static/5c875f3ec660e092cf893f60b4a288df/SimpleSabotage.pdf

Also there is IMO nothing for the TC at this point. Its actively worked on code,
there is NO disagreement that any bugs or leaks need to be fixed.
And reverting this is not going to accelerate any fixes (if any bugs even remain).
Nor is it affecting anyone not using this new feature.
Your mails look like they are just for some sozial media buzz.

thx

[...]
-- 
Michael     GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB

The misfortune of the wise is better than the prosperity of the fool.
-- Epicurus

[-- Attachment #1.2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 195 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 251 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
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".

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Graphprint Patches Overview

[softworkz .]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ffmpeg-devel <ffmpeg-devel-bounces@ffmpeg.org> On Behalf Of Michael
> Niedermayer
> Sent: Donnerstag, 22. Mai 2025 13:24
> To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches <ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org>
> Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Graphprint Patches Overview
> 
> Hi Kieran
> 
> On Thu, May 22, 2025 at 08:21:48AM +0100, Kieran Kunhya via ffmpeg-devel
> wrote:
> > It's obvious basic testing was not done on this patchset seeing the scale
> > of memory leaks.
> >
> > I would like the TC to decide on reverting and proper resubmission later.
> 
> Iam not speaking for the TC here
> 
> 1. The graphprint code was on the ML for a month and resumbitted for review
>     12 times, basically noone reviewed it (going back to that will not help
> it)
> 2. The graphprint code is very actively worked on (thats normal and good
>     and what git master is for and thats how it improves quickly)
> 3. The statement that the graphprint code wasnt tested is obviously false
>     softworkz tested it. I tested at least build on multiply platforms
> 4. "seeing the scale of memory leaks." try to compare this to
>    IAMF "git log --grep IAMF --oneline", IAMF is after a year still receiving
>    frequent security fixes. This is just as a comparission
> 
> What you are doing is trying to gain from somewhat popular oppinions
> at the expense of the project and team.
> 
> many disliked the "opening of a browser" and thats now resolved
> and reverted, but instead of letting the wounds heal you throw salt in them.
> And while people are working and improving the code you push another
> round of animosity
> 
> I dont really care if the code is all reverted or not. (it seems though
> wiser to let people work on it as they already do)
> What i do not agree with is this seeding of animosity you do.
> 
> This very much reminds me of
> Simple Sabotage Field Manual
> https://www.cia.gov/static/5c875f3ec660e092cf893f60b4a288df/SimpleSabotage.pdf
> 
> Also there is IMO nothing for the TC at this point. Its actively worked on
> code,
> there is NO disagreement that any bugs or leaks need to be fixed.
> And reverting this is not going to accelerate any fixes (if any bugs even
> remain).

Just one more note on the status: This is not a work in progress, it's done
and complete, otherwise I wouldn't have submitted.
I did not check for memory leaks - yes, I should have done that! Albeit
it's not library code, no large amounts, not constantly growing and most of 
it allocated only a few milliseconds before the FFmpeg process exits.

Given the attention that some are paying to those few Kilobytes, I have to
wonder why nobody seems to be aware of the existing memory leaks with 
QSV hardware acceleration. These _do_ appear to be growing over time.


> many disliked the "opening of a browser" and thats now resolved
> and reverted, but instead of letting the wounds heal you throw salt in them.

At that time, I haven't had a chance to say anything. I will follow-up
to it shortly, but I wanted everybody incl. myself to cool down before.

What I can tell though in advance: That narrative of "inexperienced 
developer accidentally used a 'bad' API" doesn't fly. It was a 
deliberate decision under awareness of the potential risks when
not done right.

I really wonder how Kieran can't be embarrassed trying such maneuvers which
are so obvious to everybody.

Best
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".

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Graphprint Patches Overview

[Kieran Kunhya via ffmpeg-devel]

> I really wonder how Kieran can't be embarrassed trying such maneuvers which
> are so obvious to everybody.

I really wonder how you can't be embarrassed sending what imo is the
worst patchset in the history of the project.
Instead of acknowledging that, it's deflecting and playing the victim
you want to do.

Kieran
_______________________________________________
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".

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Graphprint Patches Overview

[softworkz .]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ffmpeg-devel <ffmpeg-devel-bounces@ffmpeg.org> On Behalf Of Kieran
> Kunhya via ffmpeg-devel
> Sent: Donnerstag, 22. Mai 2025 14:46
> To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches <ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org>
> Cc: Kieran Kunhya <kieran618@googlemail.com>
> Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Graphprint Patches Overview
> 
> > I really wonder how Kieran can't be embarrassed trying such maneuvers which
> > are so obvious to everybody.
> 
> I really wonder how you can't be embarrassed sending what imo is the
> worst patchset in the history of the project.
> Instead of acknowledging that, it's deflecting and playing the victim
> you want to do.
> 
> Kieran
> _______________________________________________

I like that! Keep going. Was that all you got?

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".

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Graphprint Patches Overview

[Kieran Kunhya via ffmpeg-devel]

On Thu, 22 May 2025, 15:03 softworkz ., <softworkz@hotmail.com> wrote:

>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ffmpeg-devel <ffmpeg-devel-bounces@ffmpeg.org> On Behalf Of Kieran
> > Kunhya via ffmpeg-devel
> > Sent: Donnerstag, 22. Mai 2025 14:46
> > To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches <ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org>
> > Cc: Kieran Kunhya <kieran618@googlemail.com>
> > Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Graphprint Patches Overview
> >
> > > I really wonder how Kieran can't be embarrassed trying such maneuvers
> which
> > > are so obvious to everybody.
> >
> > I really wonder how you can't be embarrassed sending what imo is the
> > worst patchset in the history of the project.
> > Instead of acknowledging that, it's deflecting and playing the victim
> > you want to do.
> >
> > Kieran
> > _______________________________________________
>
> I like that! Keep going. Was that all you got?
>
> sw
>

A patchset so bad, people who quit the project like Derek came back to
clean up your mess.

Kieran

>
_______________________________________________
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".

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Graphprint Patches Overview

[softworkz .]

> > From: Kieran Kunhya <kieran618@googlemail.com> 
> > Sent: Donnerstag, 22. Mai 2025 16:07
> > To: softworkz . <softworkz@hotmail.com>
> > Cc: FFmpeg development discussions and patches <ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org>
> > Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Graphprint Patches Overview
> > 
> > 
> > On Thu, 22 May 2025, 15:03 softworkz ., <mailto:softworkz@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: ffmpeg-devel <mailto:ffmpeg-devel-bounces@ffmpeg.org> On Behalf Of Kieran
> > > Kunhya via ffmpeg-devel
> > > Sent: Donnerstag, 22. Mai 2025 14:46
> > > To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches <mailto:ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org>
> > > Cc: Kieran Kunhya <mailto:kieran618@googlemail.com>
> > > Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Graphprint Patches Overview
> > > 
> > > > I really wonder how Kieran can't be embarrassed trying such maneuvers which
> > > > are so obvious to everybody.
> > > 
> > > I really wonder how you can't be embarrassed sending what imo is the
> > > worst patchset in the history of the project.
> > > Instead of acknowledging that, it's deflecting and playing the victim
> > > you want to do.
> > > 
> > > Kieran
> > > _______________________________________________
> > 
> > I like that! Keep going. Was that all you got?
> > 
> > sw
> 
> A patchset so bad, people who quit the project like Derek came back to clean up your mess.
> 
> Kieran 
> 
> people who quit the project like Derek came back

That'd be too much of an honour - but really, it doesn't work like that. 
You need to keep focusing on saying bad and defaming things.

Try again, I'm sure you can do better...

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".

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Graphprint Patches Overview

[softworkz .]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ffmpeg-devel <ffmpeg-devel-bounces@ffmpeg.org> On Behalf Of softworkz .
> Sent: Donnerstag, 22. Mai 2025 16:14
> To: Kieran Kunhya <kieran618@googlemail.com>
> Cc: FFmpeg development discussions and patches <ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org>
> Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Graphprint Patches Overview
> 
> 
> 
> > > From: Kieran Kunhya <kieran618@googlemail.com>
> > > Sent: Donnerstag, 22. Mai 2025 16:07
> > > To: softworkz . <softworkz@hotmail.com>
> > > Cc: FFmpeg development discussions and patches <ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org>
> > > Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Graphprint Patches Overview
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, 22 May 2025, 15:03 softworkz ., <mailto:softworkz@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: ffmpeg-devel <mailto:ffmpeg-devel-bounces@ffmpeg.org> On Behalf Of
> Kieran
> > > > Kunhya via ffmpeg-devel
> > > > Sent: Donnerstag, 22. Mai 2025 14:46
> > > > To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches <mailto:ffmpeg-
> devel@ffmpeg.org>
> > > > Cc: Kieran Kunhya <mailto:kieran618@googlemail.com>
> > > > Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Graphprint Patches Overview
> > > >
> > > > > I really wonder how Kieran can't be embarrassed trying such maneuvers
> which
> > > > > are so obvious to everybody.
> > > >
> > > > I really wonder how you can't be embarrassed sending what imo is the
> > > > worst patchset in the history of the project.
> > > > Instead of acknowledging that, it's deflecting and playing the victim
> > > > you want to do.
> > > >
> > > > Kieran
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > >
> > > I like that! Keep going. Was that all you got?
> > >
> > > sw
> >
> > A patchset so bad, people who quit the project like Derek came back to clean
> up your mess.
> >
> > Kieran
> >
> > people who quit the project like Derek came back
> 
> That'd be too much of an honour - but really, it doesn't work like that.
> You need to keep focusing on saying bad and defaming things.
> 
> Try again, I'm sure you can do better...
> 
> sw
> _______________________________________________

What's up, running out of ideas?

Maybe get even more dirty - that's always a good idea when your points
have no substance, it emphasizes your dedication and makes it more credible
for everybody.

How about this: 

Softworkz also ruined Christmas this year because he stole Santa's reindeer!

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".

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Graphprint Patches Overview

[softworkz .]

> 
> A patchset so bad, people who quit the project like Derek came back to clean up your mess.
>
> Kieran 

For background and aftermath, please read: The "bad" Patch

https://lists.ffmpeg.org/pipermail/ffmpeg-devel/2025-May/344274.html

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".

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Graphprint Patches Overview

[softworkz .]

> I really wonder how you can't be embarrassed sending what imo is the
> worst patchset in the history of the project.
> Instead of acknowledging that, it's deflecting and playing the victim
> you want to do.
> 
> Kieran

For background and aftermath, please read: The "bad" Patch

https://lists.ffmpeg.org/pipermail/ffmpeg-devel/2025-May/344274.html

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".

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Graphprint Patches Overview

[Kieran Kunhya via ffmpeg-devel]

On Thu, May 22, 2025 at 12:24 PM Michael Niedermayer
<michael@niedermayer.cc> wrote:
> 4. "seeing the scale of memory leaks." try to compare this to
>    IAMF "git log --grep IAMF --oneline", IAMF is after a year still receiving
>    frequent security fixes. This is just as a comparission

This is completely different, one is taking untrusted data and one is
creating it.

> What you are doing is trying to gain from somewhat popular oppinions
> at the expense of the project and team.
>
> many disliked the "opening of a browser" and thats now resolved
> and reverted, but instead of letting the wounds heal you throw salt in them.
> And while people are working and improving the code you push another
> round of animosity

No, I am expressing my opinion (which several people share) and I am
entitled to do so in the same way you are.

Kieran
_______________________________________________
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".