Ah, I was too quick on that answer :/ I see that they have REFS_PER_FRAME (7), TOTAL_REFS_PER_FRAME (8) _and_ NUM_REF_FRAMES (8), in which case it is redundant indeed. I will remove that on v4. -- Daniel On Fri, 2022-12-23 at 20:15 -0300, Daniel Almeida wrote: > > > + int cur_offset[V4L2_AV1_NUM_REF_FRAMES - 1]; > > > + int cur_roffset[V4L2_AV1_NUM_REF_FRAMES - 1]; > > > > This looks like V4L2_AV1_REFS_PER_FRAME. Daniel, should be remove > > this > > V4L2_AV1_NUM_REF_FRAMES ? Its redundant with > > V4L2_AV1_TOTAL_REFS_PER_FRAME ... > > Hi. These are different. NUM_REF_FRAMES is the size of the "DPB" > while > TOTAL_REFS_PER_FRAME is the maximum number of references a frame can > use. It just so happens that in AV1 these two are close in absolute > value (i.e. 7 vs 8). > > Using VP9 as a comparison, the DPB size is still 8, but > REFS_PER_FRAME > is 3 (meaning a frame can specificy LAST, GOLDEN and ALTREF values). > > As this is per spec and a mere convenience, I vote for keeping it. > > -- Daniel
