Hi,

On Dec 12, 2011 8:50 AM, "Laurent Aimar" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 08:35:16AM -0800, Ronald S. Bultje wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 7:54 AM, Laurent Aimar <[email protected]>
wrote:
> >
> >      I think that with your patch, get_bits_count() will never be
negative and
> >     this
> >     will creates issues with some decoders.
> >
> >
> > We should fix those decoders. get_bits_left() < 0 is a bug and we should
> > document that as undefined behaviour, IMO.
>  In itself it is not a bug. It is prefectly fine for get_bits_left() to
> return < 0 without creating any issue if the user of the get bits function
> ensure that the 'overread' does not exceed the mandatory padding there is
> at the end of each buffer.
>
>  Now, it can of course be decided to make get_bits_left() returning < 0
> a non valid use case, but it's a change from what I think was previously
> understood (at least that's my impression reading various decoder codes).
> It will probably need a lot of code review before the change can be done
> safely.

I agree, but I do feel this change has lowest effect on performance while
still covering all of get_bits.

Want to help review?

Ronald
_______________________________________________
libav-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.libav.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-devel

Reply via email to