Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

FFmpeg Becomes Multi-Threaded Happy

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

  • FFmpeg Becomes Multi-Threaded Happy

    Phoronix: FFmpeg Becomes Multi-Threaded Happy

    Last week following a dispute among several core FFmpeg developers, FFmpeg was forked as libav. The group remaining in the "FFmpeg" this week have now merged the ffmpeg-mt branch to their SVN trunk code-base. This is the code that's been worked on now for nearly three years to provide multi-threaded decoding support in FFmpeg...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=OTI0NA

  • #2
    Originally posted by phoronix View Post
    Phoronix: FFmpeg Becomes Multi-Threaded Happy

    Last week following a dispute among several core FFmpeg developers, FFmpeg was forked as libav. The group remaining in the "FFmpeg" this week have now merged the ffmpeg-mt branch to their SVN trunk code-base. This is the code that's been worked on now for nearly three years to provide multi-threaded decoding support in FFmpeg...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=OTI0NA
    I'm still a bit unsure with side users should be on, ffmpeg or libav

    It was clear openoffice.org was in the wrong when libreoffice was forked but things seem a lot less clear in this instance

    Comment


    • #3
      for me it looks like a clique tried to run ffmpeg the way they liked (aka I am the boss, you do what I want you to do) and failed. So they ran away to start libav.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by FireBurn View Post
        I'm still a bit unsure with side users should be on, ffmpeg or libav

        It was clear openoffice.org was in the wrong when libreoffice was forked but things seem a lot less clear in this instance
        Seems the libav team's been making many of the same changes as the FFmpeg group sans the multithreading code...so much confusion these 2 projects may cause. Libreoffice is turning out to be the superior project to OOo, and it sounds like a tossup here with the 2 ffmpeg camps....so we shall see which group wins out.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by FireBurn View Post
          I'm still a bit unsure with side users should be on, ffmpeg or libav

          It was clear openoffice.org was in the wrong when libreoffice was forked but things seem a lot less clear in this instance
          well it not really a problem as they both cherry pick each other anyway for now it seem's, but this code is
          by http://gitorious.org/ffmpeg/ffmpeg-mt Alexander Strange "astrange", apparently Michael was just the guy that blocked it without submitting patches for so long and now decided to push it with a few tweaks or "fixed it to pass fate" as he puts it, but he has OC been forced to become far more active now since the split as active developer manpower is down there now, as they moved to libav and their own IRC channel for development and initial quicker patch review in many cases.

          libav seems easier to get as they do a direct nighty build now http://win32.libav.org/win32/
          and the AC3 stuff seems likely to be getting lots of patches lately there and other stuff being done ready for some assembly optimisations in key codec area's h.264,xVP8,AVX,x262, and 9/10bit playback merged sooner or later as the patches were submitted before the split etc

          Comment


          • #6
            The multi-threading appears to have been unmerged, based on the postings in that thread linked in the article: http://ffmpeg.org/pipermail/ffmpeg-d...ch/109952.html

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by phoronix View Post
              Phoronix: FFmpeg Becomes Multi-Threaded Happy

              Last week following a dispute among several core FFmpeg developers, FFmpeg was forked as libav. The group remaining in the "FFmpeg" this week have now merged the ffmpeg-mt branch to their SVN trunk code-base. This is the code that's been worked on now for nearly three years to provide multi-threaded decoding support in FFmpeg...

              http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=OTI0NA
              ooh Michael, its not in the SVN trunk code-base, they use GIT now and have for a while, the SVN trunk code-base is just just for legacy and set read only now, unless they changed back recently and i missed it, not likely as i do get around a bit and dont rely on auto scripts that much

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Culex View Post
                The multi-threading appears to have been unmerged, based on the postings in that thread linked in the article: http://ffmpeg.org/pipermail/ffmpeg-d...ch/109952.html
                ROTFL, i especially like Michael's

                Tue Mar 22 20:09:06 CET 2011
                If a majority of ffmpeg devels want us to undo this, i am not opposed
                if someone handles the technical side and also explains users how to
                fix their checkouts up
                .....
                But as I said previously ffmpeg is a democratic project, ffmpeg
                developers who plan to contribute to ffmpeg in the future and thus
                are affected by how the main tree looks can vote"

                then 2.20 minutes and 4 votes later

                " Tue Mar 22 22:28:44 CET 2011
                Good these are enough votes

                We will undo"

                i guess those "developers who plan to contribute to ffmpeg in the future"he's so desperate to recruit now where to slow

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by energyman View Post
                  for me it looks like a clique tried to run ffmpeg the way they liked (aka I am the boss, you do what I want you to do) and failed. So they ran away to start libav.
                  From what I was able to gleam, it appeared that the opposite was true: those in the ffmpeg sanctum sanctorum had their leadership challenged, lost the vote but refused to hand over git/site control. Looking at the libav 'mission statement', they were really stressing the whole 'democratic' aspect of the project's approach, which seems closer to the complaints that lead to the vote.

                  That said, the whole thing is less than clear.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    ah it's been fun to watch.

                    michaeln rubbed a lot of people the wrong way, but is without a doubt the person who knows libav*'s internals better than anyone else on the planet, and has tried to keep the code quality as high as possible while being the project maintainer.

                    i've only sent 1 patch (which was never commented on, presumably because it was a brutal hack), but after reading the mailing lists for 5 years, the attempted project takeover was ridiculous. the hijacking, the secrecy, having no meaningful announcement or rule list whatsoever (leading to the perhaps valid assumption that anything mans says is law), the mess exploding further when fabrice (the ffmpeg founder) presumably saw the takeover as undemocratic (secret votes, secret mailing lists, secret takeover plans, etc.) and handed control of the domain back to michaeln, the takeover crew then deciding to cut off the existing ffmpeg mailing lists out of spite (to 'reduce confusion' or some other excuse) even though it was on mplayer's infrastructure and no vote on that was staged through the mplayer mailing lists, showing an abuse of root powers, blah blah blah blah blah.

                    they should have just forked at the beginning. they just wanted the ffmpeg name and domain for themselves, and to publicly humiliate michaeln. he definitely deserves to be put in his place, or at least taught that his grammar and 'austrian humor' can very often seem insulting to newcomers and regulars alike. but at the end of the day, it was a fork gone horribly horribly wrong, but at least thanks to the licensing we'll have the best of both teams.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by popper View Post
                      ROTFL, i especially like Michael's

                      Tue Mar 22 20:09:06 CET 2011
                      If a majority of ffmpeg devels want us to undo this, i am not opposed
                      if someone handles the technical side and also explains users how to
                      fix their checkouts up
                      .....
                      But as I said previously ffmpeg is a democratic project, ffmpeg
                      developers who plan to contribute to ffmpeg in the future and thus
                      are affected by how the main tree looks can vote"

                      then 2.20 minutes and 4 votes later

                      " Tue Mar 22 22:28:44 CET 2011
                      Good these are enough votes

                      We will undo"

                      i guess those "developers who plan to contribute to ffmpeg in the future"he's so desperate to recruit now where to slow
                      And if you had actually read why it was undone you would have seen that it was not because of "naysayers" or because of people not wanting -mt. It was because of the whole merge broke history, because the ffmpeg-mt branch seems to have messed up history. I think this will be re-emerge as soon as ffmpeg-mt has a sorted out history.

                      If this was the Linux-kernel this would never have been merged in the first place, Linus has blocked DRM-pulls before, and at least once with a big lecture of the evilness of "git reset".

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Culex View Post
                        The multi-threading appears to have been unmerged, based on the postings in that thread linked in the article: http://ffmpeg.org/pipermail/ffmpeg-d...ch/109952.html
                        Originally posted by Xake View Post
                        I think this will be re-emerge as soon as ffmpeg-mt has a sorted out history.
                        It wasn't really unmerged, just the history was removed and replaced with this:

                        commit d375c1040032ed42f84b7d4ea53baad4a661b628
                        Author: Michael Niedermayer <michaelni@gmx.at>
                        Date: Tue Mar 22 22:36:57 2011 +0100

                        Fake-Merge remote-tracking branch 'ffmpeg-mt/master'

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Francesco Cosoleto View Post
                          It wasn't really unmerged, just the history was removed and replaced with this:

                          commit d375c1040032ed42f84b7d4ea53baad4a661b628
                          Author: Michael Niedermayer <michaelni@gmx.at>
                          Date: Tue Mar 22 22:36:57 2011 +0100

                          Fake-Merge remote-tracking branch 'ffmpeg-mt/master'
                          Yeah, seems like they found a better way to fix it.

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X