Le lundi 18 juillet 2022 à 18:49 -0300, Ezequiel Garcia a écrit : > Hi Jernej, > > On Mon, Jul 18, 2022 at 10:34:37PM +0200, Jernej Škrabec wrote: > > Dne ponedeljek, 18. julij 2022 ob 21:37:31 CEST je Nicolas Dufresne > > napisal(a): > > > Le lundi 18 juillet 2022 à 19:57 +0200, Jernej Škrabec a écrit : > > > > Dne ponedeljek, 18. julij 2022 ob 19:41:48 CEST je Nicolas Dufresne > > > > > > > > napisal(a): > > > > > Le lundi 18 juillet 2022 à 18:56 +0200, Jernej Skrabec a écrit : > > > > > > Not all DPB entries will be used most of the time. Unused entries will > > > > > > thus have invalid timestamps. They will produce negative buffer index > > > > > > which is not specifically handled. This works just by chance in > > > > > > current > > > > > > code. It will even produce bogus pointer, but since it's not used, it > > > > > > won't do any harm. > > > > > > > > > > > > Let's fix that brittle design by skipping writing DPB entry altogether > > > > > > if timestamp is invalid. > > > > > > > > > > > > Fixes: 86caab29da78 ("media: cedrus: Add HEVC/H.265 decoding support") > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Jernej Skrabec <jernej.skrabec@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > > > > > > drivers/staging/media/sunxi/cedrus/cedrus_h265.c | 3 +++ > > > > > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) > > > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/staging/media/sunxi/cedrus/cedrus_h265.c > > > > > > b/drivers/staging/media/sunxi/cedrus/cedrus_h265.c index > > > > > > 1afc6797d806..687f87598f78 100644 > > > > > > --- a/drivers/staging/media/sunxi/cedrus/cedrus_h265.c > > > > > > +++ b/drivers/staging/media/sunxi/cedrus/cedrus_h265.c > > > > > > @@ -147,6 +147,9 @@ static void > > > > > > cedrus_h265_frame_info_write_dpb(struct > > > > > > cedrus_ctx *ctx,> > > > > > > > > > > > > dpb[i].pic_order_cnt_val > > > > > > > > > > > > }; > > > > > > > > > > > > + if (buffer_index < 0) > > > > > > + continue; > > > > > > > > > > When I compare to other codecs, when the buffer_index does not exist, > > > > > the > > > > > addr 0 is being programmed into the HW. With this implementation is is > > > > > left > > > > > to whatever it was set for the previous decode operation. I think its is > > > > > nicer done the other way. > > > > > > > > It's done the same way as it's done in vendor lib. As I stated in commit > > > > message, actual values don't matter for unused entries. If it is used by > > > > accident, HW reaction on all zero pointers can only be worse than using > > > > old, but valid entry. > > > > > > > > Due to no real documentation and Allwinner unwillingness to share details, > > > > we'll probably never know what's best response for each error. Some things > > > > can be deduced from vendor code, but not all. > > > > > > > > I would rather not complicate this fix, especially since it's candidate > > > > for > > > > backporting. > > I think this makes sense, since it allows to fix the bug for the time > being. > > Reviewed-by: Ezequiel Garcia <ezequiel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Ack. > > Thanks! > Ezequiel > > > > > > > I am simply trying to highlight that this is not consistant with how the > > > H264 part is done. Why do we reset the register for one codec and not the > > > other ? > > > > While H264 and HEVC are similar in many ways, Cedrus uses two different cores > > or in Cedrus slang, engines, for them. They have their own quirks. One of the > > most apparent is handling of DPB array. H264 requires that same entry is > > always at the same position in HW DPB. That's not required by HEVC. > > > > Additional reasons for differences come from the fact that it's from two > > different authors (Maxime and Paul). Those differences were created at the > > beginning and it is what it is. > > > > > > > > Perhaps you should sync to your preference the driver as a whole. It also > > > seems that before your patch, some bits would be 0 and some other would be > > > very large values. Between this and leaving random value, I don't really > > > see any gain or reason for a backport. It neither break or fix anything as > > > far as I understand. > > > > Maybe there is no need to backport, but the change is nevertheless useful. As > > I explained, current code works only by chance, as we noticed with Ezequiel's > > rework. It's certainly worthwhile to make code less brittle. As far as I'm > > concerned, fixes tag can be dropped or even Ezequiel can squash this change > > into his commit, with appropriate adjustments, of course. > > > > I'm not completely sure what do you mean by syncing driver preference. Code > > changes always need a good reason to be accepted. Moving code around and > > renaming things just to be similar with something else is not. > > > > Best regards, > > Jernej > > > > > > > > My general opinion, is that we fixe the unused address (like to 0) then when > > > something goes wrong, as least it will go wrong consistently. > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > Jernej > > > > > > > > > > + > > > > > > > > > > > > cedrus_h265_frame_info_write_single(ctx, i, > > > > > > > > dpb[i].field_pic, > > > > > > > > > > > > pic_order_cnt, > > > > > > > > buffer_index); > > > > > > > >