[Cin] Test rendering whit x265

[Andrew Randrianasulu]

On Monday, August 2, 2021, Phyllis Smith via Cin <cin at lists.cinelerra-gg.org>
wrote:

> Andrew,
> Is there a flag when compiling x265 so that the user does not have to see
> these informational messages?
> I know they are good for us -- but most users will not want to see them.
> x265 [info]: HEVC encoder version 3.4
> x265 [info]: build info [Linux][GCC 10.2.1][64 bit] 8bit
> x265 [info]: using cpu capabilities: MMX2 SSE2Fast LZCNT SSSE3 SSE4.2 AVX
> FMA3 BMI2 AVX2
> x265 [info]: Main profile, Level-2 (Main tier)
> x265 [info]: Thread pool created using 16 threads
> x265 [info]: Slices                              : 1
> x265 [info]: frame threads / pool features       : 4 / wpp(4 rows)
> x265 [warning]: Source height < 720p; disabling lookahead-slices
> x265 [info]: Coding QT: max CU size, min CU size : 64 / 8
> x265 [info]: Residual QT: max TU size, max depth : 32 / 1 inter / 1 intra
> x265 [info]: ME / range / subpel / merge         : hex / 57 / 2 / 3
>

it seems at least part of this info printed by Encoder::printSummary()
function in
thirdparty/x265_3.5/source/encoder/encoder.cpp


try to just unconditionally return from very first lines in it?

like commenting out this 'if' line, while leaving return in place...

$ cat thirdparty/x265_3.5/source/encoder/encoder.cpp | grep Summary -A 10
void Encoder::printSummary() { if (m_param->logLevel < X265_LOG_INFO)
return;


> ,,,
>
>> On Sunday, August 1, 2021, Andrea paz <gamberucci.andrea at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> The correct frames are "7500", that is the ones reported by CinGG
>>> encoding. I verified on the timeline!
>>>
>>
>> thanks! (but remembering history of my hacks it never hurt to test a bit
>> more...)
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.cinelerra-gg.org/pipermail/cin/attachments/20210802/b1c24dcc/attachment.htm>