Journal of Signal Processing Systems

, Volume 63, Issue 2, pp 251–263 | Cite as

Overview of the MPEG Reconfigurable Video Coding Framework

  • Shuvra S. Bhattacharyya
  • Johan Eker
  • Jörn W. Janneck
  • Christophe Lucarz
  • Marco Mattavelli
  • Mickaël RauletEmail author


Video coding technology in the last 20 years has evolved producing a variety of different and complex algorithms and coding standards. So far the specification of such standards, and of the algorithms that build them, has been done case by case providing monolithic textual and reference software specifications in different forms and programming languages. However, very little attention has been given to provide a specification formalism that explicitly presents common components between standards, and the incremental modifications of such monolithic standards. The MPEG Reconfigurable Video Coding (RVC) framework is a new ISO standard currently under its final stage of standardization, aiming at providing video codec specifications at the level of library components instead of monolithic algorithms. The new concept is to be able to specify a decoder of an existing standard or a completely new configuration that may better satisfy application-specific constraints by selecting standard components from a library of standard coding algorithms. The possibility of dynamic configuration and reconfiguration of codecs also requires new methodologies and new tools for describing the new bitstream syntaxes and the parsers of such new codecs. The RVC framework is based on the usage of a new actor/ dataflow oriented language called CAL for the specification of the standard library and instantiation of the RVC decoder model. This language has been specifically designed for modeling complex signal processing systems. CAL dataflow models expose the intrinsic concurrency of the algorithms by employing the notions of actor programming and dataflow. The paper gives an overview of the concepts and technologies building the standard RVC framework and the non standard tools supporting the RVC model from the instantiation and simulation of the CAL model to software and/or hardware code synthesis.


Reconfigurable Video Coding CAL actor language Dataflow programming Code synthesis 


  1. 1.
    Bhattacharya, B., & Bhattacharyya, S. (2001). Parameterized dataflow modeling for DSP systems. IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, 49(10), 2408–2421. doi: 10.1109/78.950795.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bhattacharyya, S., Brebner, G., Eker, J., Janneck, J., Mattavelli, M., von Platen, C., et al. (2008) OpenDF—A dataflow toolset for reconfigurable hardware and multicore systems. In First Swedish workshop on multi-core computing (MCC) (pp. 43–49).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bilsen, G., Engels, M., Lauwereins, R., & Peperstraete, J. (1996) Cycle-static dataflow. IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, 44(2), 397–408. doi: 10.1109/78.485935.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Boutellier, J., Lucarz, C., Lafond, S., Gomez, V., & Mattavelli, M. (2009). Quasi-static scheduling of CAL actor networks for reconfigurable video coding. Springer Journal of Signal Processing Systems (Special issue on reconfigurable video coding). doi: 10.1007/s11265-009-0389-5.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Buck, J., & Lee, E. (1993). Scheduling dynamic dataflow graphs with bounded memory using the token flow model. In 1993 IEEE international conference on acoustics, speech, and signal processing. ICASSP-93 (Vol. 1, pp. 429–432). doi: 10.1109/ICASSP.1993.319147.
  6. 6.
    Eker, J., & Janneck, J. W. (2003). CAL language report specification of the CAL actor language. Tech. Rep. UCB/ERL M03/48, EECS Department, University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gu, R., Janneck, J. W., Raulet, M., & Bhattacharyya, S. S. (2009). Exploiting statically schedulable regions in dataflow programs. In International conference on acoustics, speech and signal processing. IEEE conference.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hind, M. (2001). Pointer analysis: Haven’t we solved this problem yet? In Proceedings of the 2001 ACM SIGPLAN-SIGSOFT workshop on program analysis for software tools and engineering (pp. 54–61). Snowbird: ACM.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hsu, C. J., Ko, M. Y., & Bhattacharyya, S. S. (2005). Software synthesis from the dataflow interchange format. In Proceedings of the 2005 workshop on software and compilers for embedded systems (pp. 37–49). Dallas: ACM. doi: 10.1145/1140389.1140394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    International Standard ISO/IEC FDIS 23001-5: MPEG systems technologies—Part 5: Bitstream Syntax Description Language (BSDL)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    ISO/IEC FDIS 23001-4 (2009). MPEG systems technologies— Part 4: Codec configuration representation.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    ISO/IEC FDIS 23002-4 (2009). MPEG video technologies—Part 4: Video tool library.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Janneck, J. W., Miller, I. D., Parlour, D. B., Roquier, G., Wipliez, M., & Raulet, M. (2008). Synthesizing hardware from dataflow programs: An MPEG-4 simple profile decoder case study. In IEEE workshop on signal processing systems, 2008. SiPS 2008 (pp. 287–292). doi: 10.1109/SIPS.2008.4671777.
  14. 14.
    Janneck, J., Miller, I., Parlour, D., Roquier, G., Wipliez, M., & Raulet, M. (2009). Synthesizing hardware from dataflow programs: An MPEG-4 simple profile decoder case study. Springer Journal of Signal Processing Systems (Special issue on reconfigurable video coding). doi: 10.1007/s11265-009-0397-5.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ko, M. Y., Zissulescu, C., Puthenpurayil, S., Bhattacharyya, S., Kienhuis, B., & Deprettere, E. (2007) Parameterized looped schedules for compact representation of execution sequences in DSP hardware and software implementation. IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, 55(6), 3126–3138. doi: 10.1109/TSP.2007.893964.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lee, E., & Messerschmitt, D. (1987). Synchronous data flow. Proceedings of the IEEE, 75(9), 1235–1245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lucarz, C., Mattavelli, M., Thomas-Kerr, J., & Janneck, J. (2007). Reconfigurable media coding: A new specification model for multimedia coders. In IEEE workshop on signal processing systems (pp. 481–486). doi: 10.1109/SIPS.2007.4387595.
  18. 18.
    Lucarz, C., Piat, J., & Mattavelli, M. (2009). Automatic synthesis of parsers and validation of bitstreams within the MPEG reconfigurable video coding framework. Springer Journal of Signal Processing Systems (Special issue on reconfigurable video coding). doi: 10.1007/s11265-009-0395-7 Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Murthy, P. K., & Bhattacharyya, S. S. (2000). Shared memory implementations of synchronous dataflow specifications. In Proceedings of the conference on design, automation and test in Europe (pp. 404–410). Paris: ACM. doi: 10.1145/343647.343809.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    von Platen, C., & Eker, J. (2008). Efficient realization of a cal video decoder on a mobile terminal (position paper). In IEEE workshop on signal processing systems, 2008. SiPS 2008 (pp. 176–181). doi: 10.1109/SIPS.2008.4671758.
  21. 21.
    Plishker, W., Sane, N., Kiemb, M., Anand, K., & Bhattacharyya, S. S. (2008). Functional DIF for rapid prototyping. In Proceedings of the 2008 the 19th IEEE/IFIP international symposium on rapid system prototyping (Vol. 00, pp. 17–23). Los Alamitos: IEEE Computer Society.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Raulet, M., Piat, J., Lucarz, C., & Mattavelli, M. (2008). Validation of bitstream syntax and synthesis of parsers in the MPEG reconfigurable video coding framework. In IEEE Workshop on Signal Processing Systems, 2008. SiPS 2008 (pp. 293–298). doi: 10.1109/SIPS.2008.4671778.
  23. 23.
    Roquier, G., Wipliez, M., Raulet, M., Janneck, J. W., Miller, I. D., & Parlour, D. B. (2008). Automatic software synthesis of dataflow program: An MPEG-4 simple profile decoder case study. In IEEE workshop on signal processing systems, 2008. SiPS 2008 (pp. 281–286). doi: 10.1109/SIPS.2008.4671776.
  24. 24.
    Sriram, S., & Bhattacharyya, S. S. (2000). Embedded multiprocessors: Scheduling and synchronization. New York: Marcel Dekker.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Wipliez, M., Roquier, G., & Nezan, J. (2009). Software code generation for the RVC-CAL language. Springer Journal of Signal Processing Systems (Special issue on reconfigurable video coding). doi: 10.1007/s11265-009-0390-z.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Zima, H., & Chapman, B. (1991). Supercompilers for parallel and vector computers. New York: ACM.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Shuvra S. Bhattacharyya
    • 1
  • Johan Eker
    • 2
  • Jörn W. Janneck
    • 3
  • Christophe Lucarz
    • 4
  • Marco Mattavelli
    • 4
  • Mickaël Raulet
    • 5
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of ECE and UMIACSUniversity of MarylandCollege ParkUSA
  2. 2.Ericsson ResearchLundSweden
  3. 3.Xilinx Research LabsSan JoseUSA
  4. 4.Microelectronic Systems Lab, EPFLLausanneSwitzerland
  5. 5.IETR/INSA RennesRennesFrance

Personalised recommendations