[FFmpeg-devel] [RFC PATCH] libavcodec/libopenjpeg: pix fmt selection change
Gautam Ramakrishnan
gautamramk at gmail.com
Fri Jun 12 18:50:53 EEST 2020
On Thu, Jun 11, 2020 at 9:41 PM Michael Bradshaw
<mjbshaw-at-google.com at ffmpeg.org> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jun 11, 2020 at 9:42 AM Gautam Ramakrishnan <gautamramk at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Got it. In that case we can safely ignore the patch to fix libopenjpeg.
> > However, p1_03.j2k is one of the 2 files to have ppm marker. How could I
> > validate a patch to add ppm marker? I need something to cross validate.
> > Any suggestions for that?
>
>
> Does the other file with a ppm marker have a sane pixel format? If not the
> only the only way I can think of to test this is to hack ffmpeg to remap
> the planes in libopenjpegdec.c (e.g., remap them to yuva format). You can
> use that for initial validation but it'll have to be reverted when
> committing/pushing.
>
> Long-term I'm not sure how one would regression test this without having a
> different file with a sane pixel format. I'm not sure how feasible it is to
> hack p1_03.j2k to remove a plane while retaining the ppm marker or perhaps
> hacking opj_compress to add a ppm marker to a new test file.
> _______________________________________________
> ffmpeg-devel mailing list
> ffmpeg-devel at ffmpeg.org
> https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
>
> To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email
> ffmpeg-devel-request at ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".
The other image with a PPM marker has only 3 components. I guess
it will be a recognized format. However, it has a marker which is not
yet implemented in the native decoder. I guess I'll just implement the
other feature and we will be able to test this as well.
--
-------------
Gautam |
More information about the ffmpeg-devel
mailing list