Le 13/06/2016 à 19:55, Michael Niedermayer a écrit :
On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 07:31:15PM +0200, Jerome Martinez wrote:
FFV1 decoder:
When checking pix_fmt mapping, some bitstreams are mapped to an
incorrect pix_fmt instead of being rejected (ENOSYS).
Actually, such bitstreams are not supported (FFmpeg encoder does not
produce such bitstream, such bitstream may come only from another
encoder for the moment).
- JPEG 2000 RCT 11/13/15/16 bit depths are mapped to a 8-bit FFmpeg
pix_fmt (e.g. bgr0), which is not expected.
- JPEG 2000 RCT 9/10/12/14 bit depths with alpha are mapped to a
FFmpeg pix_fmt without alpha (e.g. AV_PIX_FMT_GBRP9 for 9-bit with
alpha), which is not expected.
The order for choosing the pix_fmt is changed to the one used by
YCbCr selection (<=8 bit first).
" && !f->transparency" is added to the other lines.
ffv1dec.c | 15 ++++++++-------
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
27efc1a9821576a2a5bd8d1feaaf6c584fc69a62
0001-avcodec-ffv1dec-fix-some-unsupported-pix_fmt.patch
From 90bfd748b0e25d7a0be037280f4a0a40242f8d27 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: =?UTF-8?q?J=C3=A9r=C3=B4me=20Martinez?= <jer...@mediaarea.net>
Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2016 19:18:22 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] avcodec/ffv1dec: fix some unsupported pix_fmt
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Signed-off-by: Jérôme Martinez <jer...@mediaarea.net>
---
libavcodec/ffv1dec.c | 15 ++++++++-------
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/libavcodec/ffv1dec.c b/libavcodec/ffv1dec.c
index d2bf3a8..6a932b2 100644
--- a/libavcodec/ffv1dec.c
+++ b/libavcodec/ffv1dec.c
@@ -768,17 +768,18 @@ static int read_header(FFV1Context *f)
"chroma subsampling not supported in this colorspace\n");
return AVERROR(ENOSYS);
}
- if ( f->avctx->bits_per_raw_sample == 9)
+ if ( f->avctx->bits_per_raw_sample <= 8 && !f->transparency)
+ f->avctx->pix_fmt = AV_PIX_FMT_0RGB32;
+ else if (f->avctx->bits_per_raw_sample <= 8 && f->transparency)
+ f->avctx->pix_fmt = AV_PIX_FMT_RGB32;
+ else if (f->avctx->bits_per_raw_sample == 9 && !f->transparency)
f->avctx->pix_fmt = AV_PIX_FMT_GBRP9;
- else if (f->avctx->bits_per_raw_sample == 10)
+ else if (f->avctx->bits_per_raw_sample == 10 && !f->transparency)
f->avctx->pix_fmt = AV_PIX_FMT_GBRP10;
- else if (f->avctx->bits_per_raw_sample == 12)
+ else if (f->avctx->bits_per_raw_sample == 12 && !f->transparency)
f->avctx->pix_fmt = AV_PIX_FMT_GBRP12;
- else if (f->avctx->bits_per_raw_sample == 14)
+ else if (f->avctx->bits_per_raw_sample == 14 && !f->transparency)
f->avctx->pix_fmt = AV_PIX_FMT_GBRP14;
- else
- if (f->transparency) f->avctx->pix_fmt = AV_PIX_FMT_RGB32;
- else f->avctx->pix_fmt = AV_PIX_FMT_0RGB32;
an else "error" feels missing
I did exactly as the code few lines above: if f->colorspace == 0 and
f->avctx->bits_per_raw_sample >=17, there is also no else:
} else if (f->avctx->bits_per_raw_sample == 16 && f->transparency){
switch(16 * f->chroma_h_shift + f->chroma_v_shift) {
case 0x00: f->avctx->pix_fmt = AV_PIX_FMT_YUVA444P16; break;
case 0x10: f->avctx->pix_fmt = AV_PIX_FMT_YUVA422P16; break;
case 0x11: f->avctx->pix_fmt = AV_PIX_FMT_YUVA420P16; break;
}
} // **** an else "error" feels missing here too. ****
pix_fmt would not be initialized after the patch
When I test the code, pix_fmt is initialized to -1 (AV_PIX_FMT_NONE)
before running this part, and the error is caught by the "format not
supported" message, which looks like a good message for that.
I have no problem with adding such else in the patch, but the code would
not be coherent (an else "error" feels missing if f->colorspace == 0,
and else "error" does not feel missing if f->colorspace == 1), so I
would like to have the confirmation that this is what you really want.
Note: BTW about missing things, there is no av_log() message when
f->colorspace == 0 && f->transparency && !f->chroma_plane &&
->avctx->bits_per_raw_sample >8 (=gray+alpha with a bit depth of more
than 8), just a "else return AVERROR(ENOSYS);", I was actually willing
to remove these 2 lines in order to have more coherency (no "else" so
"format not supported" message a bit later in the code) but I did not
want to add different fixes in the same patch.
_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-devel mailing list
ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
