Closed
Bug 1237023
Opened 9 years ago
Closed 9 years ago
VP9 packetization code compliant with IETF draft and interop with Chrome
Categories
(Core :: WebRTC: Audio/Video, defect, P1)
Core
WebRTC: Audio/Video
Tracking
()
RESOLVED
FIXED
mozilla46
Tracking | Status | |
---|---|---|
firefox46 | --- | fixed |
People
(Reporter: jesup, Assigned: jesup)
References
(Blocks 1 open bug)
Details
Attachments
(2 files)
(deleted),
text/x-review-board-request
|
pkerr
:
review+
|
Details |
MozReview Request: Bug 1237023: update of cherry-pick of VP9 - works with some chroma issues r?pkerr
(deleted),
text/x-review-board-request
|
pkerr
:
review+
|
Details |
+++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #1090742 +++
We need VP9 packetization code to interop with Chrome's impl of the draft VP9 packetization spec. Support for independent layers/SVC is not required at this time, though if we get it, great.
Likely we can cherry-pick the code from the upstream webrtc.org VP9 support, ahead of importing stable branch 48 of webrtc.org.
Assignee | ||
Updated•9 years ago
|
Rank: 12
Assignee | ||
Comment 1•9 years ago
|
||
Review commit: https://reviewboard.mozilla.org/r/32207/diff/#index_header
See other reviews: https://reviewboard.mozilla.org/r/32207/
Assignee | ||
Comment 2•9 years ago
|
||
Review commit: https://reviewboard.mozilla.org/r/32209/diff/#index_header
See other reviews: https://reviewboard.mozilla.org/r/32209/
Assignee | ||
Comment 3•9 years ago
|
||
Note that I decided to defined RTC_DCHECK/etc part way through, so some of the code I imported/merged has been modified, and some hasn't. I could go either way on this, probably it's simpler if the imported code keeps RTC_DCHECK
Assignee | ||
Updated•9 years ago
|
Attachment #8711492 -
Flags: feedback?(pkerr)
Assignee | ||
Updated•9 years ago
|
Attachment #8711493 -
Flags: feedback?(pkerr)
Updated•9 years ago
|
Attachment #8711492 -
Flags: feedback?(pkerr) → feedback+
Updated•9 years ago
|
Attachment #8711493 -
Flags: feedback?(pkerr) → feedback+
Assignee | ||
Comment 4•9 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 8711493 [details]
MozReview Request: Bug 1237023: update of cherry-pick of VP9 - works with some chroma issues r?pkerr
Review request updated; see interdiff: https://reviewboard.mozilla.org/r/32209/diff/1-2/
Attachment #8711493 -
Flags: feedback+
Assignee | ||
Updated•9 years ago
|
Attachment #8711492 -
Flags: feedback+ → review?(pkerr)
Assignee | ||
Updated•9 years ago
|
Attachment #8711493 -
Flags: review?(pkerr)
Assignee | ||
Updated•9 years ago
|
Attachment #8711492 -
Attachment description: MozReview Request: Bug 1237023: WIP cherry-pick of VP9 packetization/jitter-buffer/encoder code from Webrtc.org 48 f?pkerr → MozReview Request: Bug 1237023: cherry-pick of VP9 packetization/jitter-buffer/encoder code from Webrtc.org 48 r?pkerr
Assignee | ||
Updated•9 years ago
|
Attachment #8711493 -
Attachment description: MozReview Request: Bug 1237023: WIP update of cherry-pick of VP9 - works with some chroma issues f?pkerr → MozReview Request: Bug 1237023: update of cherry-pick of VP9 - works with some chroma issues r?pkerr
Comment 5•9 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 8711492 [details]
MozReview Request: Bug 1237023: cherry-pick of VP9 packetization/jitter-buffer/encoder code from Webrtc.org 48 r?pkerr
https://reviewboard.mozilla.org/r/32207/#review28879
::: media/webrtc/trunk/webrtc/modules/interface/module_common_types.h:208
(Diff revision 1)
> +#if 0
Why the #if 0? Is there a more informative ifdef label that could be used? Is this documentation?
Attachment #8711492 -
Flags: review?(pkerr) → review+
Comment 6•9 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 8711493 [details]
MozReview Request: Bug 1237023: update of cherry-pick of VP9 - works with some chroma issues r?pkerr
https://reviewboard.mozilla.org/r/32209/#review28881
Attachment #8711493 -
Flags: review?(pkerr) → review+
Assignee | ||
Comment 7•9 years ago
|
||
> ::: media/webrtc/trunk/webrtc/modules/interface/module_common_types.h:208
> (Diff revision 1)
> > +#if 0
>
> Why the #if 0? Is there a more informative ifdef label that could be used?
> Is this documentation?
Switched to more informative #if ... #else
Comment 10•9 years ago
|
||
bugherder |
https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/f442638a278c
https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/4bd447a3d7da
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 9 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Target Milestone: --- → mozilla46
Comment 11•9 years ago
|
||
Forgot build config review.
Assignee | ||
Comment 12•9 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Karl Tomlinson (ni?:karlt) from comment #11)
> Forgot build config review.
Ouch, sorry about that. Mostly this is just merging code from upstream but that bit wasn't (it was making it build with our libvpx in the non-system-libvpx case)
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•