Jul 7, 2020, 20:58 by mar...@martin.st: > On Tue, 7 Jul 2020, Lynne wrote: > >> We return 0 for this particular architecture but should instead be >> returning the number of lines. >> Fixes users who check the return value matches what they expect. >> > > The change looks good in itself, but it also looks like we have the same > issue in the arm version of the same assembly, right? > > I presume we don't have a preexisting checkasm test for this function, where > we could add a check for the return value (which would expose all other > instances of the same issue)? >
I've checked (there's only PPC) and the only other place we return 0 is in the 32bit ARM asm. I've never done 32bit ARM asm and it looks more involved since the asm functions return a void, and I've no idea how that arch handles return values. Submitted a patch to check sws_scale return value in its API tests. As the scale functions are directly called, I don't think there's a need to run checkasm on this. Since patch looks good to you I'll push it tomorrow unless someone else has any comments. _______________________________________________ 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".
