On 10/10/17, wm4 <nfx...@googlemail.com> wrote: > On Tue, 10 Oct 2017 03:24:56 +0300 > Ivan Kalvachev <ikalvac...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On 10/9/17, wm4 <nfx...@googlemail.com> wrote: >> > On Mon, 9 Oct 2017 03:04:53 +0300 >> > Ivan Kalvachev <ikalvac...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> >> The public functions av_alloc_vdpaucontext() and >> >> av_vdpau_alloc_context() are allocating AVVDPAUContext >> >> structure that is supposed to be placed in avctx->hwaccel_context. >> >> >> >> However the rest of libavcodec/vdpau.c uses avctx->hwaccel_context >> >> as struct VDPAUHWContext, that is bigger and does contain >> >> AVVDPAUContext as first member. >> >> >> >> The usage includes write to the new variables in the bigger stuct, >> >> without checking for block size. >> >> >> >> Fix by always allocating the bigger structure. >> >> >> >> BTW, >> >> I have no idea why the new fields haven't simply been added to the >> >> existing struct... >> >> It seems that the programmer who wrote this has been aware of the >> >> problem, >> >> because av_vdpau_bind_context reallocates the structure. >> >> >> >> It might be good idea to check the other usages of this reallocation >> >> function. >> >> >> >> Best Regards >> >> Ivan Kalvachev >> > >> > IMO not really worth fixing at this point, because this is the old-old >> > vdpau API. Even av_vdpau_bind_context() (which does not require using >> > av_alloc_vdpaucontext()) is deprecated. Or rather should be - I just >> > haven't bothered deprecating it because the deprecation dance is too >> > messy. In any case, you shouldn't use any of those APIs - use the >> > generic hwaccel API instead (setting hw_frames_ctx or hw_device_ctx). >> >> Every bug must be fixed, even if the code is going to be removed next. >> >> Since you "didn't bother" to deprecate it, this code will remain even >> after >> the API bump. And it is still (mis)used by at least one program that >> crashed on me. >> >> So it MUST be fixed. > > Well, if you insist, feel free to attempt to maintain it, but I won't > care, even if I make changes to the code under the newer API (about > which I care). I tried to remove some vdpau code earlier which had > been deprecated for years, but this was rejected, so why care about > deprecation or whether an ancient API is actually broken? Not me.
You are not making any sense. Anyway. Do you have any objection for this patch to be committed? _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
