On Wed, 15 Mar 2017 08:58:39 -0400 "Ronald S. Bultje" <rsbul...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi, > > On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 8:21 AM, Kieran Kunhya <kier...@obe.tv> wrote: > > > On Wed, 15 Mar 2017 at 12:05 Ronald S. Bultje <rsbul...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 11:12 PM, Michael Niedermayer < > > > mich...@niedermayer.cc> wrote: > > > > > > > Fixes timeout with 847/clusterfuzz-testcase-5291877358108672 > > > > Fixes timeout with 850/clusterfuzz-testcase-5721296509861888 > > > > > > > > This likely will need to be tweaked > > > > > > > > > Sorry, but this is getting insane. I can't possibly be expected to just > > > approve this. What's your end game? > > > > > > > I have tons of testcases for h264 that are 1KB and can make error > > concealment run for ages. > > Trying to fix them will just become a never ending set of heuristics to > > guess the conditions like the above. > > > Right. Also, this is fuzz-specific code. I've made remarks about this > before, but I'll say it again: ideally, I don't want fuzz-specific code > anywhere. Especially not "carefully crafted" crap like this. +1 Effort should be put into generally making the code more robust, instead of adding new elaborate special cases for every fuzz sample we hit... _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
