Am 19.04.15 um 00:49 schrieb Michael Niedermayer:
> On Sun, Apr 19, 2015 at 12:20:01AM +0200, Andreas Cadhalpun wrote:
>> On 18.04.2015 23:34, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
>>> On Sat, Apr 18, 2015 at 10:28:53PM +0200, Andreas Cadhalpun wrote:
I don't think an assert would be good here. If you wa
On Sun, Apr 19, 2015 at 12:20:01AM +0200, Andreas Cadhalpun wrote:
> On 18.04.2015 23:34, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> > On Sat, Apr 18, 2015 at 10:28:53PM +0200, Andreas Cadhalpun wrote:
> >> I don't think an assert would be good here. If you want to protect against
> >> future code changes, I wou
On 18.04.2015 23:34, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 18, 2015 at 10:28:53PM +0200, Andreas Cadhalpun wrote:
>> I don't think an assert would be good here. If you want to protect against
>> future code changes, I would rather leave the error return.
>> But I'd also be fine with dropping thi
On Sat, Apr 18, 2015 at 10:28:53PM +0200, Andreas Cadhalpun wrote:
> On 18.04.2015 21:46, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> > On Sat, Apr 18, 2015 at 09:13:30PM +0200, Andreas Cadhalpun wrote:
> >> On 18.04.2015 20:42, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> >>> On Sat, Apr 18, 2015 at 08:13:30PM +0200, Andreas Ca
On 18.04.2015 21:46, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 18, 2015 at 09:13:30PM +0200, Andreas Cadhalpun wrote:
>> On 18.04.2015 20:42, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
>>> On Sat, Apr 18, 2015 at 08:13:30PM +0200, Andreas Cadhalpun wrote:
@@ -1290,8 +1290,16 @@ static int revert_channel_correl
On Sat, Apr 18, 2015 at 09:13:30PM +0200, Andreas Cadhalpun wrote:
> On 18.04.2015 20:42, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> > On Sat, Apr 18, 2015 at 08:13:30PM +0200, Andreas Cadhalpun wrote:
> >> @@ -1290,8 +1290,16 @@ static int revert_channel_correlation(ALSDecContext
> >> *ctx, ALSBlockData *bd,
>
On 18.04.2015 20:42, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 18, 2015 at 08:13:30PM +0200, Andreas Cadhalpun wrote:
>> @@ -1290,8 +1290,16 @@ static int revert_channel_correlation(ALSDecContext
>> *ctx, ALSBlockData *bd,
>>
>> if (ch[dep].time_diff_sign) {
>> t
On Sat, Apr 18, 2015 at 08:47:08PM +0200, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 18, 2015 at 08:42:58PM +0200, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> > On Sat, Apr 18, 2015 at 08:13:30PM +0200, Andreas Cadhalpun wrote:
> > > On 18.04.2015 20:05, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> > > > On Sat, Apr 18, 2015 at 06
On Sat, Apr 18, 2015 at 08:42:58PM +0200, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 18, 2015 at 08:13:30PM +0200, Andreas Cadhalpun wrote:
> > On 18.04.2015 20:05, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> > > On Sat, Apr 18, 2015 at 06:58:30PM +0200, Andreas Cadhalpun wrote:
> > >> If begin is smaller than t, t
On Sat, Apr 18, 2015 at 08:13:30PM +0200, Andreas Cadhalpun wrote:
> On 18.04.2015 20:05, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> > On Sat, Apr 18, 2015 at 06:58:30PM +0200, Andreas Cadhalpun wrote:
> >> If begin is smaller than t, the subtraction 'begin -= t' wraps around,
> >> because begin is unsigned. The
On 18.04.2015 20:05, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 18, 2015 at 06:58:30PM +0200, Andreas Cadhalpun wrote:
>> If begin is smaller than t, the subtraction 'begin -= t' wraps around,
>> because begin is unsigned. The same applies for end < t.
>>
>> This causes segmentation faults.
>>
>> Sig
On Sat, Apr 18, 2015 at 06:58:30PM +0200, Andreas Cadhalpun wrote:
> If begin is smaller than t, the subtraction 'begin -= t' wraps around,
> because begin is unsigned. The same applies for end < t.
>
> This causes segmentation faults.
>
> Signed-off-by: Andreas Cadhalpun
> ---
> libavcodec/als
If begin is smaller than t, the subtraction 'begin -= t' wraps around,
because begin is unsigned. The same applies for end < t.
This causes segmentation faults.
Signed-off-by: Andreas Cadhalpun
---
libavcodec/alsdec.c | 8
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
diff --git a/libavcodec/alsdec
13 matches
Mail list logo
