[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] opt: check image size when setting it

Andreas Cadhalpun andreas.cadhalpun at googlemail.com
Fri Jan 6 21:05:14 EET 2017


On 11.12.2016 21:45, Andreas Cadhalpun wrote:
> On 11.12.2016 21:03, Hendrik Leppkes wrote:
>> On Sun, Dec 11, 2016 at 7:48 PM, Andreas Cadhalpun
>> <andreas.cadhalpun at googlemail.com> wrote:
>>> On 11.12.2016 10:04, Hendrik Leppkes wrote:
>>>> I still see the problem that this option code does not know which
>>>> pix_fmt the numbers relate to and as such would keep the old limit in
>>>> place despite there being no technical reasons for it.
>>>
>>> And I still think that av_image_check_size should be changed to
>>> accept the largest value valid for any pixel format (once every place
>>> needing stricter limits is switched to the pixel format sensitive
>>> check).
>>> Do you disagree with this or what is your point?
>>
>> I could probably live with a simple w*h overflow check (more or less),
>> which av_image_check_size then probably would end up being if I
>> understand you right?
> 
> I don't think so. For example, av_image_check_size2 accepts resolutions
> like 100000x80000 for AV_PIX_FMT_MONOWHITE and thus av_image_check_size
> should also accept this, even though the number of pixels is larger
> than INT_MAX. However, that's not the current state of affairs, so
> until the work is done to actually use the pixel format specific limits,
> the option code should check for the old limit.
> 
>> Thats much higher then the current limit in most cases and while we
>> should try to move this to size_t/ptrdiff_t eventually to lift the
>> limit even higher on 64-bit platforms, its OK for now.
> 
> Note that av_image_check_size is documented to check that
> "all bytes of the image can be addressed with a signed int",
> so increasing the limit higher requires using a different function.

I assume I've convinced you, so I'll apply this patch soon, unless
I hear back from you.

Best regards,
Andreas



More information about the ffmpeg-devel mailing list