https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=98005

--- Comment #33 from Andy Furniss <adf.lists@gmail.com> ---
(In reply to Boyuan Zhang from comment #32)
> Hi Andy,
> 
> To summarise your test results, basically you saw the following 3 issues
> with CQP, is it correct?
> 
> - Issue #1. For large clip, sometime you can "invalid GstVaapiCodedBuffer
> size (0 bytes)" error.

Turns out I don't need a large clip.

Just running the transcode test above but with vaapih264enc rate-control=cqp
init-qp=30 may give this error.

> - Issue #2. Random corruption observed when using CQP. Corruption issue is
> gone after disable the statement

Issue 1 and 2 are gone with that disabled.

> "if (context->desc.h264enc.rate_ctrl.rate_ctrl_method
> !=PIPE_H264_ENC_RATE_CONTROL_METHOD_DISABLE"
> - Issue #3. Encoding speed is twice faster when setting QP<=28

This one was my fault because I forgot to put a ! queue ! in my command and is
nothing to do with the patches/not a real issue.

> So far I'm lucky enough that my test haven't trigger any of the issue yet. I
> will spend more time to try from my side. Again, if you could share the
> commands you were using to trigger the above 3 issue, that would be very
> appreciated.
> 
> In the meantime, I would like to push the 2 patches to upstream first.
> Because this two patches don't change the behaviour of CQP, but only fixing
> VBR/CBR. Therefore, I believe CQP fix should be apart from these 2 patches.

CQP works perfectly with vanilla mesa, it is broken by patch 1.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.