Hi, On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 5:30 PM, Andreas Cadhalpun < andreas.cadhal...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> On 06.01.2017 22:30, Ronald S. Bultje wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 2:48 PM, Andreas Cadhalpun < > > andreas.cadhal...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > > >> Signed-off-by: Andreas Cadhalpun <andreas.cadhal...@googlemail.com> > >> --- > >> libavformat/nistspheredec.c | 1 + > >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > >> > >> diff --git a/libavformat/nistspheredec.c b/libavformat/nistspheredec.c > >> index 782d1dfbfb..9023ed7fc7 100644 > >> --- a/libavformat/nistspheredec.c > >> +++ b/libavformat/nistspheredec.c > >> @@ -80,6 +80,7 @@ static int nist_read_header(AVFormatContext *s) > >> > >> avpriv_set_pts_info(st, 64, 1, st->codecpar->sample_rate); > >> > >> + FF_RETURN_ON_OVERFLOW(s, st->codecpar->channels && > >> st->codecpar->bits_per_coded_sample > INT_MAX / st->codecpar->channels) > > > > > > Same comment as the other one, the channels == 0 isn't a valid case that > we > > want to special case, probably check that it's not zero separately. > > Here I disagree: This is only the demuxer, that doesn't need to know > the number of channels, which can be set later by the decoder. > (For example the shorten decoder does this.) Hm ... I don't like how we're adding special-case code for hypothetical cases that can only come from entirely broken muxers or fuzzers. I'll leave it to others to break the tie. Ronald _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
