On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 01:15:40PM -0400, Vittorio Giovara wrote: > On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 12:49 PM, Diego Biurrun <[email protected]> wrote: > > --- a/libavutil/tests/xtea.c > > +++ b/libavutil/tests/xtea.c > > @@ -22,6 +22,7 @@ > > #include <string.h> > > > > #include "libavutil/intreadwrite.h" > > +#include "libavutil/mem.h" > > #include "libavutil/xtea.h" > > > > #define XTEA_NUM_TESTS 6 > > @@ -80,41 +81,44 @@ static void test_xtea(AVXTEA *ctx, uint8_t *dst, const > > uint8_t *src, > > > > int main(void) > > { > > - AVXTEA ctx; > > uint8_t buf[16], iv[8]; > > int i, j; > > static const uint8_t src[32] = "HelloWorldHelloWorldHelloWorld"; > > uint8_t ct[32]; > > uint8_t pl[32]; > > + AVXTEA *ctx = av_xtea_alloc(); > > + if (!ctx) > > + return -1; > > I think you have to return positive values for errors.
I don't think so. What gives you the idea? The FATE test relies on comparing output and I think it's somewhat beneficial to have different return values for different errors. Diego _______________________________________________ libav-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.libav.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-devel
