[Libva] gen7 h264 encode bitrate behaviour

Alexey warpdest at gmail.com
Fri Aug 22 03:09:16 PDT 2014


Hi,

Yes its constant bit-rate control, that work better that existing for me. I
realize it's inside avcenc.c . I have not delved into driver sources, so
may be worth to do something like that in driver.

Best Regards,
Warp.


On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 4:48 AM, Zhao, Yakui <yakui.zhao at intel.com> wrote:

> On Wed, 2014-08-20 at 16:38 +0400, Alexey wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> >
>
> Hi, Alexey
>
>     What is the purpose of your patch? I guees that it is for the
> Bit-rate control?
>
>     If it is for constant bit-rate control, I don't think that it is
> necessary to put it in the avcenc test-case as the constant bit-rate
> control is done in low-level driver. Maybe it looks more reasonable that
> it is put into the driver.
>
> Thanks.
>      Yakui
>
> > I decided that problem with small modify avcenc.c . After each encoded
> > frame i do :
> >
> > enc->needsize = ( enc->frame_bit_rate * 1024 ) / 8;
> > if ( *outlen ) {
> >     float o = (float)( (float)*outlen) / ( (float)enc->needsize /
> > (float)enc->fps );
> >     if ( o > 1.0f ) {
> >         enc->slice_qp_delta_next += 2;
> >     } else if ( o < 0.9f ){
> >         enc->slice_qp_delta_next--;
> >         }
> >     if ( enc->slice_qp_delta_next < -33 ) enc->slice_qp_delta_next =
> > -33;
> >     if ( enc->slice_qp_delta_next > 17 ) enc->slice_qp_delta_next =
> > 17;
> >     }
> >
> >
> > *outlen its size of current encoded frame.
> >
> >
> >
> > And in void avcenc_update_slice_parameter(struct h264_vaapi_enc *enc,
> > int slice_type) i set slice_param->slice_qp_delta =
> > enc->slice_qp_delta;
> >
> >
> > Initial qp value enc->qp_value = 33;
> >
> >
> >
> > Best Regards,
> >
> > Warp.
> >
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 7:09 PM, Chris Healy <cphealy at gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >         Hi Zhao,
> >
> >
> >         Thanks for pointing out the QP adjustment logic.  I made the
> >         (bad) assumption previously that it would be in gen7_mfc.c.
> >
> >         I will file a bug and make a YUV stream available in the
> >         coming days.
> >
> >         Thanks,
> >
> >
> >         Chris
> >
> >
> >
> >         On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 6:03 PM, Zhao, Yakui
> >         <yakui.zhao at intel.com> wrote:
> >                 On Mon, 2014-08-18 at 11:19 -0600, Chris Healy wrote:
> >                 > Well after taking a look at the behaviour again this
> >                 morning, (it was
> >                 > real late for me last night), it does seem that this
> >                 change did not
> >                 > solve the issue.  I'm still seeing the same
> >                 inconsistent frame rate.
> >                 >
> >                 > The encoder still seems to be trying to average
> >                 things over a 20
> >                 > second window.
> >                 >
> >                 >
> >                 > Where is the code that implements the per frame
> >                 adjustment of the QP?
> >                 > avcenc.c seems to just be responsible for setting up
> >                 some encoder
> >                 > preferences but does not do any dynamic QP
> >                 adjustment.  Also, how can
> >                 > I enable some debugging to see what the QP is set to
> >                 for each frame?
> >                 >
> >                 >
> >
> >
> >                 Hi, Chris
> >
> >                     The QP adjustment is implemented in the function
> >                 of
> >                 intel_mfc_brc_postpack in gen6_mfc_common.c. (Sorry
> >                 that there is no
> >                 debug option to control whether the QP is printed for
> >                 every frame. You
> >                 can print the corresponding QP).
> >
> >                     Will you please help to create one bug in
> >                 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/  and then attach your
> >                 original YUV stream?
> >                 Then we can look at the issue.
> >
> >                 Thanks.
> >                     Yakui
> >                 >
> >                 >
> >                 > On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 6:27 AM, Gwenole Beauchesne
> >                 > <gb.devel at gmail.com> wrote:
> >                 >         Hi Chris,
> >                 >
> >                 >         2014-08-18 11:55 GMT+02:00 Chris Healy
> >                 <cphealy at gmail.com>:
> >                 >         > Hi Zhao,
> >                 >         >
> >                 >         > I just tested the new values you gave me.
> >                 This is a night
> >                 >         and day
> >                 >         > improvement in bitrate consistency.  Based
> >                 on the small
> >                 >         amount of testing I
> >                 >         > have done, this seems to completely
> >                 address the problem!
> >                 >         >
> >                 >         > I have to understand why moving from 15
> >                 and 900 to 1 and 60
> >                 >         makes the
> >                 >         > bitrate so consistent.  Both pairs of
> >                 values are the same so
> >                 >         given the
> >                 >         > following comment:  /* Tc =
> >                 num_units_in_tick / time_sacle
> >                 >         */  I have the
> >                 >         > same Tc in both cases.
> >                 >
> >                 >
> >                 >         This should make zero difference. If it
> >                 does, there should
> >                 >         some arith
> >                 >         error around, that needs to be investigated.
> >                 900/15 or 60/1
> >                 >         still
> >                 >         yield 30 fps.
> >                 >
> >                 >         Note: a tick is the minimum time slice that
> >                 can be represented
> >                 >         in the
> >                 >         coded data. Typically, a field. time_scale
> >                 is the frequency.
> >                 >
> >                 >         > How is this changing things for the better
> >                 AND, what is the
> >                 >         tradeoff in
> >                 >         > using these values.  (There must be some
> >                 downside otherwise
> >                 >         these values
> >                 >         > would have always been 1 and 2 * fps.)
> >                 >         >
> >                 >         > Regards,
> >                 >         >
> >                 >         > Chris
> >                 >         >
> >                 >         > (PS - Thank you!)
> >                 >         >
> >                 >         >
> >                 >         > On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 1:36 AM, Chris
> >                 Healy
> >                 >         <cphealy at gmail.com> wrote:
> >                 >         >>
> >                 >         >> Hi Zhao,
> >                 >         >>
> >                 >         >> I've done testing with both 30 and 24 fps
> >                 and received
> >                 >         similar results.
> >                 >         >>
> >                 >         >> I will test with the values you
> >                 mentioned.  Can you explain
> >                 >         how
> >                 >         >> num_units_in_tick and time_scale work?
> >                 (What is a tick?)
> >                 >         >>
> >                 >         >> Also, is there a good place in the Intel
> >                 driver to dump the
> >                 >         QP value used
> >                 >         >> for each frame?  I'd like to add some QP
> >                 logging when an
> >                 >         env variable is
> >                 >         >> set.
> >                 >         >>
> >                 >         >> Regards,
> >                 >         >>
> >                 >         >> Chris
> >                 >         >>
> >                 >         >>
> >                 >         >> On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 1:30 AM, Zhao,
> >                 Yakui
> >                 >         <yakui.zhao at intel.com> wrote:
> >                 >         >>>
> >                 >         >>> On Mon, 2014-08-18 at 01:13 -0600, Chris
> >                 Healy wrote:
> >                 >         >>> > Hi Zhao,
> >                 >         >>> >
> >                 >         >>> >
> >                 >         >>> > I enabled LIBVA_TRACE recently and
> >                 grabbed a bunch of
> >                 >         output.  Here's
> >                 >         >>> > a link to good size fragment of the
> >                 output:
> >                 >         >>> >
> >                 >         >>> > http://pastebin.com/KJYzGQAA
> >                 >         >>> >
> >                 >         >>> >
> >                 >         >>> > Here's answers to the specific
> >                 questions you asked:
> >                 >         (From LIBVA_TRACE
> >                 >         >>> > output)
> >                 >         >>> >
> >                 >         >>> > [57113.237423]  intra_period = 30
> >                 >         >>> > [57113.237424]  intra_idr_period = 30
> >                 >         >>> > [57113.237425]  ip_period = 1
> >                 >         >>> > [57113.237427]  bits_per_second =
> >                 3700000
> >                 >         >>> > [57113.237428]  max_num_ref_frames = 2
> >                 >         >>> > [57113.237469]  num_units_in_tick = 15
> >                 >         >>> > [57113.237470]  time_scale = 900
> >                 >         >>>
> >                 >         >>> If the expected fps is 24, the setting
> >                 of
> >                 >         num_units_in_tick/time_scale
> >                 >         >>> is incorrect. It will be better that you
> >                 should use the
> >                 >         following
> >                 >         >>> setting in your tool:
> >                 >         >>>    num_units_in_tick = 1
> >                 >         >>>    time_scale = 2 * fps
> >                 >         >>>
> >                 >         >>>
> >                 >         >>>
> >                 >         >>> >
> >                 >         >>> > I see avenc.c, but it's unclear to me
> >                 if I am dealing
> >                 >         with an issue
> >                 >         >>> > with the encoder application or
> >                 something lower down in
> >                 >         libva or
> >                 >         >>> > libva-driver-intel or the HW itself.
> >                 >         >>> >
> >                 >         >>> >
> >                 >         >>> > Am I correct in believing (simplified)
> >                 that the HW is
> >                 >         just given a raw
> >                 >         >>> > video frame and a QP and the HW
> >                 returns a chunk of
> >                 >         encoded data that
> >                 >         >>> > is "some size" and that it is the
> >                 responsibility of the
> >                 >         SW above the
> >                 >         >>> > HW to dynamically adjust the QP to hit
> >                 the target
> >                 >         bitrate to meet
> >                 >         >>> > whatever the rate control algorithm
> >                 deems correct?
> >                 >         >>> >
> >                 >         >>>
> >                 >         >>> When the CBR mode is used, the driver
> >                 will adjust QP
> >                 >         dynamically so that
> >                 >         >>> the encoded bitrate can meet with the
> >                 requirement of
> >                 >         target bitrate
> >                 >         >>> based on the input encoding
> >                 parameter(For example:
> >                 >         intra_period,
> >                 >         >>> ip_period, time_scale, num_units_in_tick
> >                 and so on).
> >                 >         >>>
> >                 >         >>>
> >                 >         >>> > If this is the case, where is the code
> >                 that is
> >                 >         dynamically adjusting
> >                 >         >>> > the QP?  Also, in the HW, where are
> >                 the registers and
> >                 >         bits control the
> >                 >         >>> > QP?  (I'm looking at the "Intel ®
> >                 OpenSource HD Graphics
> >                 >         Programmer’s
> >                 >         >>> > Reference Manual (PRM) Volume 2 Part
> >                 3: Multi-Format
> >                 >         Transcoder – MFX
> >                 >         >>> > (Ivy Bridge)" so a reference to the
> >                 registers might be
> >                 >         helpful for me
> >                 >         >>> > to understand better.)
> >                 >         >>> >
> >                 >         >>> >
> >                 >         >>> > Regards,
> >                 >         >>> >
> >                 >         >>> > Chris
> >                 >         >>> >
> >                 >         >>> >
> >                 >         >>> >
> >                 >         >>> > On Sun, Aug 17, 2014 at 11:58 PM,
> >                 Zhao, Yakui
> >                 >         <yakui.zhao at intel.com>
> >                 >         >>> > wrote:
> >                 >         >>> >         On Sun, 2014-08-17 at 19:27
> >                 -0600, Chris Healy
> >                 >         wrote:
> >                 >         >>> >         > I've done some further
> >                 analysis with our real
> >                 >         stream and we
> >                 >         >>> >         experience
> >                 >         >>> >         > the same inconsistent
> >                 bitrate behaviour as
> >                 >         with the test
> >                 >         >>> >         app.  It
> >                 >         >>> >         > seems to me that the way the
> >                 bitrate control
> >                 >         works doesn't
> >                 >         >>> >         do a good
> >                 >         >>> >         > job of handling certain
> >                 input video sequences
> >                 >         and the
> >                 >         >>> >         encoded bitrate
> >                 >         >>> >         > subsequently spikes as a
> >                 result of this.
> >                 >         >>> >         >
> >                 >         >>> >         > To help understand what I'm
> >                 dealing with, I've
> >                 >         posted a
> >                 >         >>> >         video on
> >                 >         >>> >         > youtube showing the video
> >                 being encoded:
> >                 >         >>> >         >
> >                 >         >>> >         >
> >                 www.youtube.com/watch?v=LpYS_9IB0jU
> >                 >         >>> >         >
> >                 >         >>> >         >
> >                 >         >>> >         > I've also posted a bitrate
> >                 graph online too
> >                 >         that shows what
> >                 >         >>> >         happens
> >                 >         >>> >         > when encoding the video
> >                 referenced above:
> >                 >         >>> >         >
> >                 >         >>> >         > http://snag.gy/imvBe.jpg
> >                 >         >>> >         >
> >                 >         >>> >         >
> >                 >         >>> >         > In the above graph, I set
> >                 the targeted encode
> >                 >         bitrate to
> >                 >         >>> >         3.7Mbps, CBR,
> >                 >         >>> >         > and High Profile H.264.
> >                 Most of the time the
> >                 >         bitrate hovers
> >                 >         >>> >         around
> >                 >         >>> >         > 3.7Mbps, but sometimes the
> >                 bitrate drops very
> >                 >         low then
> >                 >         >>> >         spikes up very
> >                 >         >>> >         > high.  I also notice that
> >                 when the bitrate
> >                 >         drops down low
> >                 >         >>> >         then spikes
> >                 >         >>> >         > up real high, the "highness"
> >                 seems to be a
> >                 >         function of how
> >                 >         >>> >         much and
> >                 >         >>> >         > long the bitrate was under
> >                 3.7Mbps.  It seems
> >                 >         that the rate
> >                 >         >>> >         control
> >                 >         >>> >         > logic is taking a 20 second
> >                 running bitrate
> >                 >         average and
> >                 >         >>> >         trying it's
> >                 >         >>> >         > best to keep the aggregate
> >                 bitrate at 3.7Mbps,
> >                 >         so if the
> >                 >         >>> >         scene
> >                 >         >>> >         > complexity drops, the rate
> >                 control logic
> >                 >         reacts by cranking
> >                 >         >>> >         the QP to
> >                 >         >>> >         > a very low value (high
> >                 quality) to bring the
> >                 >         bitrate back
> >                 >         >>> >         up.  This
> >                 >         >>> >         > behaviour combined with the
> >                 fact that the
> >                 >         video goes to a
> >                 >         >>> >         simple fixed
> >                 >         >>> >         > image, then crossfades to
> >                 something complex in
> >                 >         less than 20
> >                 >         >>> >         seconds
> >                 >         >>> >         > when the QP is a very low
> >                 value results in the
> >                 >         massive spike
> >                 >         >>> >         in
> >                 >         >>> >         > bitrate.  (This is my naive
> >                 understanding of
> >                 >         what’s going
> >                 >         >>> >         on.)
> >                 >         >>> >         >
> >                 >         >>> >         > The code I'm using to encode
> >                 and stream is
> >                 >         based in large
> >                 >         >>> >         part on
> >                 >         >>> >         >
> >                 libva/test/encode/h264encode.c.  I'm not sure
> >                 >         if the logic
> >                 >         >>> >         for doing
> >                 >         >>> >         > rate control is in libva,
> >                 libva-driver-intel,
> >                 >         or supposed to
> >                 >         >>> >         be driven
> >                 >         >>> >         > by the code that uses libva.
> >                 Am I dealing
> >                 >         with an issue
> >                 >         >>> >         with the
> >                 >         >>> >         > encoder itself or is it more
> >                 likely my code
> >                 >         not correctly
> >                 >         >>> >         driving the
> >                 >         >>> >         > encoder?
> >                 >         >>> >
> >                 >         >>> >
> >                 >         >>> >         Hi, Chris
> >                 >         >>> >
> >                 >         >>> >             Thank you for reporting
> >                 the issue.
> >                 >         >>> >             Will you please check the
> >                 encoding
> >                 >         parameters required by
> >                 >         >>> >         CBR? (For
> >                 >         >>> >         example:
> >                 intra_period/ip_period/
> >                 >         >>> >
> >                  num_units_in_tick/time_scale/bits_per_second in
> >                 >         >>> >
> >                  VAEncSequenceParameterBufferH264.)
> >                 >         >>> >
> >                 >         >>> >             Will you please take a
> >                 look at the example
> >                 >         of
> >                 >         >>> >         libva/test/encode/avcenc.c and
> >                 see whether it is
> >                 >         helpful?
> >                 >         >>> >         (There exist two h264 encoding
> >                 examples because
> >                 >         of history
> >                 >         >>> >         reasons. The
> >                 >         >>> >         avcenc case is more consistent
> >                 with the
> >                 >         libva-intel-driver.)
> >                 >         >>> >
> >                 >         >>> >         Thanks.
> >                 >         >>> >             Yakui
> >                 >         >>> >
> >                 >         >>> >         > What can be changed to keep
> >                 the actual bitrate
> >                 >         from being so
> >                 >         >>> >         bursty
> >                 >         >>> >         > given the video behaviour?
> >                 >         >>> >         >
> >                 >         >>> >         >
> >                 >         >>> >         > Regards,
> >                 >         >>> >         >
> >                 >         >>> >         > Chris
> >                 >         >>> >         >
> >                 >         >>> >         >
> >                 >         >>> >         >
> >                 >         >>> >         >
> >                 >         >>> >         >
> >                 >         >>> >         >
> >                 >         >>> >         >
> >                 >         >>> >         >
> >                 >         >>> >         >
> >                 >         >>> >         > On Fri, Aug 15, 2014 at 6:03
> >                 PM, Chris Healy
> >                 >         >>> >         <cphealy at gmail.com>
> >                 >         >>> >         > wrote:
> >                 >         >>> >         >         I've been encoding
> >                 h264 content using
> >                 >         HD 4000 HW and
> >                 >         >>> >         am not
> >                 >         >>> >         >         able to make heads
> >                 or tails of the way
> >                 >         the encoder
> >                 >         >>> >         is behaving
> >                 >         >>> >         >         from the standpoint
> >                 of the data size
> >                 >         coming out of
> >                 >         >>> >         the
> >                 >         >>> >         >         encoder.
> >                 >         >>> >         >
> >                 >         >>> >         >         I have a 24 fps 720p
> >                 video that is the
> >                 >         same image
> >                 >         >>> >         for ~8
> >                 >         >>> >         >         seconds, then a 1.5
> >                 second fade to the
> >                 >         next image
> >                 >         >>> >         followed by
> >                 >         >>> >         >         another ~8 seconds
> >                 on that image.
> >                 >         This goes on and
> >                 >         >>> >         on
> >                 >         >>> >         >         indefinitely.  I
> >                 would have expected
> >                 >         that the
> >                 >         >>> >         bitrate would
> >                 >         >>> >         >         have been pretty
> >                 low, then spike for
> >                 >         1.5 seconds
> >                 >         >>> >         then go back
> >                 >         >>> >         >         to a similarly low
> >                 value.
> >                 >         >>> >         >
> >                 >         >>> >         >
> >                 >         >>> >         >         When I look at the
> >                 data coming out of
> >                 >         the encoder
> >                 >         >>> >         with a 4Mb/s
> >                 >         >>> >         >         bitrate set and CBR,
> >                 I'm seeing almost
> >                 >         the inverse
> >                 >         >>> >         where most
> >                 >         >>> >         >         of the time, the
> >                 bitrate is pretty
> >                 >         close to 4Mb/s
> >                 >         >>> >         then it
> >                 >         >>> >         >         spikes above 4Mb/s
> >                 (presumably for the
> >                 >         fade), then
> >                 >         >>> >         it drops
> >                 >         >>> >         >         down to ~2Mbps for a
> >                 second or so
> >                 >         before going back
> >                 >         >>> >         up to
> >                 >         >>> >         >         ~4Mb/s.
> >                 >         >>> >         >
> >                 >         >>> >         >         The strangest part
> >                 is that for the
> >                 >         first ~30 seconds
> >                 >         >>> >         of
> >                 >         >>> >         >         encode, across the
> >                 board, the bitrate
> >                 >         is ~2x the
> >                 >         >>> >         bitrate from
> >                 >         >>> >         >         second 31 -> end of
> >                 encode.  (So, I'm
> >                 >         hitting a
> >                 >         >>> >         typical rate
> >                 >         >>> >         >         of 7Mbps and peaking
> >                 out at 13Mbps.)
> >                 >         >>> >         >
> >                 >         >>> >         >
> >                 >         >>> >         >         Is this behaviour
> >                 expected with gen7
> >                 >         HW?  Is there
> >                 >         >>> >         something I
> >                 >         >>> >         >         can do in the
> >                 initial setup that will
> >                 >         cap the MAX
> >                 >         >>> >         bitrate
> >                 >         >>> >         >         regardless of the
> >                 impact on encode
> >                 >         quality?
> >                 >         >>> >         >
> >                 >         >>> >         >         Regards,
> >                 >         >>> >         >
> >                 >         >>> >         >         Chris
> >                 >         >>> >         >
> >                 >         >>> >         >
> >                 >         >>> >         >
> >                 >         >>> >
> >                 >         >>> >
> >                 >         >>> >
> >                 >         >>> >
> >                 >         >>> >
> >                 >         >>>
> >                 >         >>>
> >                 >         >>
> >                 >         >
> >                 >         >
> >                 >
> >                 >         >
> >                 _______________________________________________
> >                 >         > Libva mailing list
> >                 >         > Libva at lists.freedesktop.org
> >                 >         >
> >                 http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libva
> >                 >         >
> >                 >
> >                 >
> >                 >         Regards,
> >                 >         --
> >                 >         Gwenole Beauchesne
> >                 >         Intel Corporation SAS / 2 rue de Paris,
> >                 92196 Meudon Cedex,
> >                 >         France
> >                 >         Registration Number (RCS): Nanterre B 302
> >                 456 199
> >                 >
> >                 >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >         _______________________________________________
> >         Libva mailing list
> >         Libva at lists.freedesktop.org
> >         http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libva
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Libva mailing list
> > Libva at lists.freedesktop.org
> > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libva
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libva/attachments/20140822/2f92b421/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Libva mailing list