Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

VP8 Over VDPAU In Gallium3D Is Emeric's Target

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • VP8 Over VDPAU In Gallium3D Is Emeric's Target

    Phoronix: VP8 Over VDPAU In Gallium3D Is Emeric's Target

    For those that were excited last week by the French student proposing an H.264 VA-API/VDPAU state tracker for Gallium3D that in turn was revised to WebM or Theora acceleration support instead (since no current-generation GPUs have dedicated video decode engines for these formats), Emeric has firmed up his proposal...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=OTI2OA

  • #2
    fantastic stuff. Good luck.

    Comment


    • #3
      Sweet! Bioware's latest game (Dragon Age 2) contains characters so realistic that they actually exist?

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by phoronix View Post
        Phoronix: VP8 Over VDPAU In Gallium3D Is Emeric's Target

        Support for VP8 should be able to be extended most easily with VDPAU compared to VA-API
        Why adding VP8 support to VDPAU would be easier than for VA-API? In both cases, it's just a matter of adding a video codec ID, and new structures. Even for XvBA, this wouldn't be a problem. XvMC is indeed too dead to worth the effort.

        BTW, using VDPAU also locks future development to video decode only. VA-API does support encoding. Encoding for E600 does exist today, SNB support will appear next. Even in the future, when AMD implements H.264 video encoding acceleration in their future VCE unit, VA-API can still be a fit.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by gbeauche View Post
          Why adding VP8 support to VDPAU would be easier than for VA-API? In both cases, it's just a matter of adding a video codec ID, and new structures. Even for XvBA, this wouldn't be a problem. XvMC is indeed too dead to worth the effort.

          BTW, using VDPAU also locks future development to video decode only. VA-API does support encoding. Encoding for E600 does exist today, SNB support will appear next. Even in the future, when AMD implements H.264 video encoding acceleration in their future VCE unit, VA-API can still be a fit.
          Respond to the thread.

          Your reply isn't going to do any good on the phoronix forums.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by gbeauche View Post
            Why adding VP8 support to VDPAU would be easier than for VA-API? In both cases, it's just a matter of adding a video codec ID, and new structures. Even for XvBA, this wouldn't be a problem. XvMC is indeed too dead to worth the effort.

            BTW, using VDPAU also locks future development to video decode only. VA-API does support encoding. Encoding for E600 does exist today, SNB support will appear next. Even in the future, when AMD implements H.264 video encoding acceleration in their future VCE unit, VA-API can still be a fit.
            plus OC people s seem to forget this
            "The current video decode/encode interface is window system independent, so that potentially it can be used with graphics sub-systems other than X. In a nutshell it is basically a scheme to pass various types of data buffers from the application to the GPU for decoding or encoding. Feedback on the API is greatly welcomed, as this is intended to be a community collaborative effort."

            and OC ffmpeg/libav has now started talking about and coding (prototypes) to include HW decode...VA API/Crystal HD on their IRC channels etc.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by mattst88 View Post
              Respond to the thread.

              Your reply isn't going to do any good on the phoronix forums.
              sure, but Re: [Intel-gfx] ML etc isn't exactly conducive to users or even external x264, ffmpeg/libav, or gstreamer dev's read those mailing lists never mind contribute,

              whereas this and other public phoronix thread's do , so it does not harm if some of you/Intel-gfx/MESA come here and start a few tech 'proof of concept' and related discussions and see what happen's

              the simple fact is people prefer web message boards today rather than full time mailing lists, many a time the IRC devs dont even read any MESA and related mailing list's as it's more effort for one off comments that may or not get expanded...

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by gbeauche View Post
                Why adding VP8 support to VDPAU would be easier than for VA-API? In both cases, it's just a matter of adding a video codec ID, and new structures. Even for XvBA, this wouldn't be a problem.
                Read the thread, and you'll see this was sort of invented by Michael. Or a misunderstanding, if you want to be more charitable.

                Basically, there's already been some work done on VDPAU and the dev is more familiar with it. So they said something like 'i'll just go with vdpau since it will be easier', and michael somehow connected that to adding support for new codecs.

                My hope is that once the code for one is done, support for the other API can hopefully be added on top with minimal extra effort.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by gbeauche View Post
                  VA-API does support encoding. Encoding for E600 does exist today, SNB support will appear next. Even in the future, when AMD implements H.264 video encoding acceleration in their future VCE unit, VA-API can still be a fit.
                  your ffmpeg patch set just got posted to libav and they have some problem by the look of it ?

                  http://lists.libav.org/pipermail/lib...il/001240.html
                  you might want to pop over there or on their IRC if you cant be bothered to follow subscribe there

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by gbeauche View Post
                    BTW, using VDPAU also locks future development to video decode only.
                    True, however vdpau does support decoding to system ram and from there you could look at various venues and methods to do your encoding (cpu, gpu even to a separate gpu or multiple GPU's or any combo).

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      This whole thing is kind of useless. VP8 on the internet is low-bitrate enough as to not need acceleration. H.264 would be much more important to have on top of Gallium.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by popper View Post
                        your ffmpeg patch set just got posted to libav and they have some problem by the look of it ?

                        http://lists.libav.org/pipermail/lib...il/001240.html
                        you might want to pop over there or on their IRC if you cant be bothered to follow subscribe there
                        I follow this list, but in quick read-only mode for now. If they have problems with the vaapi configure parts that are posted, this means they also have problems with the vdpau configure parts that are already in... Otherwise, they are just looking at non problems.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by RealNC View Post
                          This whole thing is kind of useless. VP8 on the internet is low-bitrate enough as to not need acceleration. H.264 would be much more important to have on top of Gallium.
                          This was due to the current lack of HW acceleration at the moment. Google is looking into people to adopt VP8 HW decoding because even current ARM Cortex A9 chips can't handle 1080p VP8 contents. And this is worse when some chips (e.g. Tegra) don't implement NEON extensions to get help. This will change pretty soon, Rockchip already demoed a chip that supports HW VP8 decode. For desktop (PC) GPUs, you still have to wait for N+1 or N+2 generation, depending on the manufacturer. Then, higher bitrate (and quality to begin with) VP8 contents can appear.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by gbeauche View Post
                            And this is worse when some chips (e.g. Tegra) don't implement NEON extensions to get help.
                            Totally off topic, but not being an embedded developer guy at all, when I first heard that I didn't believe it. What the hell went through the NVIDIA engineers' minds to make them think that leaving off the SIMD engine for any CPU meant for anything more complex than a toaster is in any way acceptable?

                            This is why I don't fear mobile devices taking over the PC or game console world. (Maybe the mobile game console world is in trouble, sure, but then only because Nintendo and Sony both are utter morons and either screw over every third-party developer they can or just design whacked out expensive hardware with gimmicky features but only 1/30th the power of my two year old phone.)

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by elanthis View Post
                              Totally off topic, but not being an embedded developer guy at all, when I first heard that I didn't believe it. What the hell went through the NVIDIA engineers' minds to make them think that leaving off the SIMD engine for any CPU meant for anything more complex than a toaster is in any way acceptable?
                              This would have made for a larger die (larger -> more transistors -> more heat) and they probably thought people would use CUDA for multimedia kernels instead. Next-generation Tegra chips will integrate this extension though, IIRC.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X