On 12/16/11, Maans Rullgaard <[email protected]> wrote:
> Paul B Mahol <[email protected]> writes:
>
>> On 12/16/11, Maans Rullgaard <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> Paul B Mahol <[email protected]> writes:
>>>
>>>> On 12/16/11, Maans Rullgaard <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>> Paul B Mahol <[email protected]> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>  libavcodec/cljr.c |    6 +++---
>>>>>>  1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> diff --git a/libavcodec/cljr.c b/libavcodec/cljr.c
>>>>>> index a5ee738..199fd98 100644
>>>>>> --- a/libavcodec/cljr.c
>>>>>> +++ b/libavcodec/cljr.c
>>>>>> @@ -57,9 +57,9 @@ static int decode_frame(AVCodecContext *avctx,
>>>>>>      if (p->data[0])
>>>>>>          avctx->release_buffer(avctx, p);
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -    if (buf_size / avctx->height < avctx->width) {
>>>>>> -        av_log(avctx, AV_LOG_ERROR,
>>>>>> -               "Resolution larger than buffer size. Invalid
>>>>>> header?\n");
>>>>>> +    if (buf_size != avctx->height * avctx->width) {
>>>>>> +        av_log(avctx, AV_LOG_ERROR, "got a buffer with %d bytes when
>>>>>> %d
>>>>>> were expected\n",
>>>>>> +               buf_size, avctx->height * avctx->width);
>>>>>
>>>>> These checks are not equivalent, the old version allowing an oversized
>>>>> input packet.  Is this change intentional?
>>>>
>>>> Oversized input packets can not be considered valid packets.
>>>
>>> Of course they can, if they start with a valid packet.
>>
>> Same as undersized, they can still can have valid data
>
> An undersized packet can never have a _complete_ valid frame.  An
> oversized one can.  The code currently allows junk at the end, and your
> patch changes that.  Why?

I stole check from cyuv decoder. If you prefer to keep compatibility with
previous code I'm fine with it.
_______________________________________________
libav-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.libav.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-devel

Reply via email to