Recherche avancée

Sur d’autres sites (9645)

• javaCV ffmpeg Android N Linker error

  8 février 2017, par B. Noble

  I’m hoping I can get some help on an issue I cannot seem to solve. I am trying to use javaCV FFmpegFrameGrabber to capture an RTSP stream. I have followed the instructions on configuring javaCV manually. I have ffmpeg.jar, javacv.jar, and javacpp.jar in the libs folder and the .so files in jniLibs/armeabi-v7a. I am using javaCV version 1.3.1.

  When I Run the application on a device running Android 5.0.1, it runs fine, but I’ve tried it on several devices running Android 7+ and I consistently get the error :

  E/linker : library "/system/lib/libdl.so" ("/system/lib/libdl.so")
  needed or dlopened by "/system/lib/libnativeloader.so" is not
  accessible for the namespace :

  Any suggestions on how to get this working on Android 7+ ?

• libx265 now calls an outdated version of ffmpeg

  29 décembre 2016, par kg404

  I referenced this existing posting to get started : How to install libx265 for ffmpeg on Mac OSX

  Now that I have uninstalled ffmpeg with "brew uninstall —force ffmpeg" and installed with the corrected version listed in the link above, I am getting the error message : bash : /usr/local/Cellar/ffmpeg/3.0.2/bin/ffmpeg : No such file or directory.

  The issue is easily located due to /ffmpeg/3.0.2 not existing. The only existing directory at that location is 3.2.2, and the corresponding bin/ffmpeg inside of it.

  It is helpful to note that I had previously gotten ffmpeg doing what I needed it to by following this installation guide, and my issues arose only when trying to enable and use h265 encoding following the steps in the above linked posting : http://www.renevolution.com/ffmpeg/2013/03/16/how-to-install-ffmpeg-on-mac-os-x.html

  The last step in the above-linked renevolution post installs more libraries - perhaps there is some dependency I’m missing ? I have attempted reinstalling and following the renevolution post to get back to my baseline testing, but am still getting the same ’version’ error.

  Any help or guidance would be appreciated. I am very new at this and trying to solve a problem a bit over my head.

• arm : vp9 : Add NEON loop filters

  14 novembre 2016, par Martin Storsjö

  arm : vp9 : Add NEON loop filters
  This work is sponsored by, and copyright, Google.
  The implementation tries to have smart handling of cases
  
  where no pixels need the full filtering for the 8/16 width
  
  filters, skipping both calculation and writeback of the
  
  unmodified pixels in those cases. The actual effect of this
  
  is hard to test with checkasm though, since it tests the
  
  full filtering, and the benefit depends on how many filtered
  
  blocks use the shortcut.
  Examples of relative speedup compared to the C version, from checkasm :
  
                            Cortex       A7     A8     A9    A53
  
  vp9_loop_filter_h_4_8_neon :          2.72   2.68   1.78   3.15
  
  vp9_loop_filter_h_8_8_neon :          2.36   2.38   1.70   2.91
  
  vp9_loop_filter_h_16_8_neon :         1.80   1.89   1.45   2.01
  
  vp9_loop_filter_h_16_16_neon :        2.81   2.78   2.18   3.16
  
  vp9_loop_filter_mix2_h_44_16_neon :   2.65   2.67   1.93   3.05
  
  vp9_loop_filter_mix2_h_48_16_neon :   2.46   2.38   1.81   2.85
  
  vp9_loop_filter_mix2_h_84_16_neon :   2.50   2.41   1.73   2.85
  
  vp9_loop_filter_mix2_h_88_16_neon :   2.77   2.66   1.96   3.23
  
  vp9_loop_filter_mix2_v_44_16_neon :   4.28   4.46   3.22   5.70
  
  vp9_loop_filter_mix2_v_48_16_neon :   3.92   4.00   3.03   5.19
  
  vp9_loop_filter_mix2_v_84_16_neon :   3.97   4.31   2.98   5.33
  
  vp9_loop_filter_mix2_v_88_16_neon :   3.91   4.19   3.06   5.18
  
  vp9_loop_filter_v_4_8_neon :          4.53   4.47   3.31   6.05
  
  vp9_loop_filter_v_8_8_neon :          3.58   3.99   2.92   5.17
  
  vp9_loop_filter_v_16_8_neon :         3.40   3.50   2.81   4.68
  
  vp9_loop_filter_v_16_16_neon :        4.66   4.41   3.74   6.02
  The speedup vs C code is around 2-6x. The numbers are quite
  
  inconclusive though, since the checkasm test runs multiple filterings
  
  on top of each other, so later rounds might end up with different
  
  codepaths (different decisions on which filter to apply, based
  
  on input pixel differences). Disabling the early-exit in the asm
  
  doesn’t give a fair comparison either though, since the C code
  
  only does the necessary calcuations for each row.
  Based on START_TIMER/STOP_TIMER wrapping around a few individual
  
  functions, the speedup vs C code is around 4-9x.
  This is pretty similar in runtime to the corresponding routines
  
  in libvpx. (This is comparing vpx_lpf_vertical_16_neon,
  
  vpx_lpf_horizontal_edge_8_neon and vpx_lpf_horizontal_edge_16_neon
  
  to vp9_loop_filter_h_16_8_neon, vp9_loop_filter_v_16_8_neon
  
  and vp9_loop_filter_v_16_16_neon - note that the naming of horizonal
  
  and vertical is flipped between the libraries.)
  In order to have stable, comparable numbers, the early exits in both
  
  asm versions were disabled, forcing the full filtering codepath.
                             Cortex           A7      A8      A9     A53
  
  vp9_loop_filter_h_16_8_neon :             597.2   472.0   482.4   415.0
  
  libvpx vpx_lpf_vertical_16_neon :         626.0   464.5   470.7   445.0
  
  vp9_loop_filter_v_16_8_neon :             500.2   422.5   429.7   295.0
  
  libvpx vpx_lpf_horizontal_edge_8_neon :   586.5   414.5   415.6   383.2
  
  vp9_loop_filter_v_16_16_neon :            905.0   784.7   791.5   546.0
  
  libvpx vpx_lpf_horizontal_edge_16_neon : 1060.2   751.7   743.5   685.2
  Our version is consistently faster on on A7 and A53, marginally slower on
  
  A8, and sometimes faster, sometimes slower on A9 (marginally slower in all
  
  three tests in this particular test run).
  This is an adapted cherry-pick from libav commit
  
  dd299a2d6d4d1af9528ed35a8131c35946be5973.
  Signed-off-by : Ronald S. Bultje <rsbultje@gmail.com>
  

  • [DH] libavcodec/arm/Makefile
  • [DH] libavcodec/arm/vp9dsp_init_arm.c
  • [DH] libavcodec/arm/vp9lpf_neon.S