[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH v3 3/3] libavcodec/jpeb2000dec.c: Handle non EOC streams

[Gautam Ramakrishnan]

On Sat, Mar 28, 2020 at 4:59 PM Carl Eugen Hoyos <ceffmpeg at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Am Sa., 28. März 2020 um 12:13 Uhr schrieb Gautam Ramakrishnan
> <gautamramk at gmail.com>:
> >
> > On Sat, Mar 28, 2020 at 3:54 PM Carl Eugen Hoyos <ceffmpeg at gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Am Sa., 28. März 2020 um 05:19 Uhr schrieb <gautamramk at gmail.com>:
> > > >
> > > > From: Gautam Ramakrishnan <gautamramk at gmail.com>
> > > >
> > > > This patch allows decoding of j2k streams which do
> > > > not have an EOC marker. OpenJPEG implements a similar
> > > > check.
> > > > ---
> > > >  libavcodec/jpeg2000dec.c | 5 +++--
> > > >  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/libavcodec/jpeg2000dec.c b/libavcodec/jpeg2000dec.c
> > > > index 44b3e7e41b..99fcb2cf68 100644
> > > > --- a/libavcodec/jpeg2000dec.c
> > > > +++ b/libavcodec/jpeg2000dec.c
> > > > @@ -2076,8 +2076,9 @@ static int jpeg2000_read_main_headers(Jpeg2000DecoderContext *s)
> > > >
> > > >          len = bytestream2_get_be16(&s->g);
> > > >          if (len < 2 || bytestream2_get_bytes_left(&s->g) < len - 2) {
> > > > -            av_log(s->avctx, AV_LOG_ERROR, "Invalid len %d left=%d\n", len, bytestream2_get_bytes_left(&s->g));
> > > > -            return AVERROR_INVALIDDATA;
> > > > +            av_log(s->avctx, AV_LOG_WARNING, "Invalid len %d left=%d\n", len, bytestream2_get_bytes_left(&s->g));
> > > > +            av_log(s->avctx, AV_LOG_WARNING, "Stream does not end with EOC.\n");
> > > > +            return 0;
> > >
> > > The return value should depend on the "strictness" requested by the user,
> > > grep for "EXPLODE".
> > >
> > I did not understand this point too well. Could you point out some example I
> > could refer to?
>
> Did you grep for "EXPLODE"?
>
Ran grep with -rnw accidently. Found it. Shall get back if I do not understand
> > > As said, the first two patches are (imo) not ok, either merge them or split
> > > them differently so that the first does not add an unused function but
> > > only splits ("uselessly" but making the second patch easier to read) an
> > > existing function.
> > >
> > Shall do that. What is your opinion on the third patch? Do you feel
> > the fix is right?
>
> Yes, I believe the same is done for jpeg.
In that case I'll make all the changes and resubmit a v4
>
> Carl Eugen
> _______________________________________________
> ffmpeg-devel mailing list
> ffmpeg-devel at ffmpeg.org
> https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
>
> To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email
> ffmpeg-devel-request at ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".



-- 
-------------
Gautam |