On Wed, Mar 31, 2021 at 2:41 PM Anton Khirnov <an...@khirnov.net> wrote:
> Quoting Vittorio Giovara (2021-03-30 18:55:27) > > Hello, > > I was debugging an issue with a video file containing an invalid > > display matrix, probably produced by a non conforming software. > > > > The content of the matrix is: > > 00000000: 0 65536 0 > > 00000001: -1 0 0 > > 00000002: 0 0 1073741824 > > > > The -1 (stored as 4294967295) was probably a 1 shifted 32 times instead > > of 16. The problem is that this value is bypassing the validation check > > in the code below, and the resulting computed SAR value becomes 1:65536. > > > > This change interprets extremely low entries as invalid and makes sure > > to skip them in the SAR computation. This passes fate, but I haven't been > > able to test this extensively. > > Please see the attached patch, any feedback or better solution is > welcome. > > -- > > Vittorio > > > > From 54ec72276cbb6f2536e73ff81b7d49a736ec1900 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > > From: Vittorio Giovara <vittorio.giov...@gmail.com> > > Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2021 16:47:39 +0200 > > Subject: [PATCH] mov: Skip computing SAR from invalid display matrix > elements > > > > --- > > I'm wondering if that code should set sample_aspect_ratio at all. There > are two other bits of code in mov.c that may set sample_aspect_ratio, > and it's not clear whether it applies _in addition_ to the display > matrix or not. > Unfortunately there are many (old-ish) samples that rely on the display matrix to adjust the aspect ratio. We added a test for this case in particular, check out fate-mov-zombie if you have some time. -- Vittorio _______________________________________________ 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".
