Hi, On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 11:08 AM, Kostya Shishkov <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, Mar 09, 2012 at 10:37:58AM -0800, Ronald S. Bultje wrote: >> On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 10:35 AM, Kostya Shishkov >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> > On Fri, Mar 09, 2012 at 10:31:59AM -0800, Ronald S. Bultje wrote: >> >> From: "Ronald S. Bultje" <[email protected]> >> >> >> >> MPC8 allows indices of mpc_CC up to -1, and mpc_SCF up to -6, thus pad >> >> the tables by that much on the left end. >> >> >> >> Found-by: Mateusz "j00ru" Jurczyk and Gynvael Coldwind >> >> CC: [email protected] >> >> --- >> >> libavcodec/mpc.c | 6 +++--- >> >> libavcodec/mpc7.c | 4 ++-- >> >> libavcodec/mpcdata.h | 10 +++++++--- >> >> 3 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) >> > >> > I'd rather prefer clip/error on invalid values in MPC8 decoder. >> >> I have a hard time calling them invalid. In particular for mpc_CC[], >> the mpc8 decoder very specifically has code handling -1, it appears to >> be adding white noise or so. > > clip scalefactors then and pad mpc_CC[] then
I still wonder why the bitstream very specifically allows for scalefactor indices up to -6. Why allow for that if -6 to -1 are unused or clipped? I'd rather want to know their meaning. Ronald _______________________________________________ libav-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.libav.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-devel
