On Thu, 2021-07-01 at 09:41 -0300, James Almer wrote:
> On 6/17/2021 3:10 AM, Fei Wang wrote:
> > shifted_order_hints is computed by data with int plus data with
> > int.
> > Switch to int8_t may lose its precision.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Fei Wang <fei.w.w...@intel.com>
> > ---
> > libavcodec/cbs_av1_syntax_template.c | 2 +-
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/libavcodec/cbs_av1_syntax_template.c
> > b/libavcodec/cbs_av1_syntax_template.c
> > index 6fe6e9a4f3..956d45e132 100644
> > --- a/libavcodec/cbs_av1_syntax_template.c
> > +++ b/libavcodec/cbs_av1_syntax_template.c
> > @@ -355,7 +355,7 @@ static int
> > FUNC(set_frame_refs)(CodedBitstreamContext *ctx, RWContext *rw,
> > AV1_REF_FRAME_ALTREF2, AV1_REF_FRAME_ALTREF
> > };
> > int8_t ref_frame_idx[AV1_REFS_PER_FRAME],
> > used_frame[AV1_NUM_REF_FRAMES];
> > - int8_t shifted_order_hints[AV1_NUM_REF_FRAMES];
> > + int shifted_order_hints[AV1_NUM_REF_FRAMES];
>
> Would int16_t be enough? If so, use that.
int16_t can fixed my clip. But as I mentioned in commit message, this
variable is get with int plus int, switch to int16_t may still has
potential threat.
Also when shifted_order_hints is called, it turns back to int again:
int hint = shifted_order_hints[i];
Thanks
Fei
>
> LGTM either way.
>
> > int cur_frame_hint, latest_order_hint, earliest_order_hint,
> > ref;
> > int i, j;
> >
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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".
_______________________________________________
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".
