On Tue, 1 Apr 2025, Martin Storsjö wrote:
On Tue, 1 Apr 2025, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
#define DEF_CHECKASM_CHECK_FUNC(type, fmt) \
int checkasm_check_##type(const char *file, int line, \
const type *buf1, ptrdiff_t stride1, \
const type *buf2, ptrdiff_t stride2, \
- int w, int h, const char *name) \
+ int w, int h, const char *name, \
+ int align_w, int align_h, \
+ int padding) \
{ \
+ int aligned_w = (w + align_w - 1) & ~(align_w - 1); \
+ int aligned_h = (h + align_h - 1) & ~(align_h - 1); \
this can overflow
feel free to fix in a seperate patch
Feel free to propose a patch for how you'd prefer to have it fixed then...
I
don't see this as a real world problem - w and h are bounded by the tests
themselves, and likewise the alignments - I don't see us having tests
using
buffers with a width near INT32_MAX?
maybe but then
if we want our asm code to handle such extrem cases, something needs to
test it
ill send a patch based on this: (once your patches are in / minus in case
i forget)
int64_t aligned_w = (w - 1LL + align_w) & ~(align_w - 1); \
if (aligned_w != (int32_t)aligned_w)
return AVERROR(EINVAL)
Ok, if you find that important.
I'll go ahead and push patches 1-2 and 4 from this set, soon, holding off of
patch 3/4 while waiting for someone to fix the Loongarch HEVC SIMD.
Pushed.
// Martin
_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-devel mailing list
ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email
ffmpeg-devel-requ...@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".
