On 12/7/18, Michael Niedermayer <mich...@niedermayer.cc> wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 06, 2018 at 03:26:41PM +0100, Paul B Mahol wrote:
>> This recovers state with #7374 linked sample.
>>
>> Work funded by Open Broadcast Systems.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Paul B Mahol <one...@gmail.com>
>> ---
>> libavcodec/h264_refs.c | 2 +-
>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/libavcodec/h264_refs.c b/libavcodec/h264_refs.c
>> index eaf965e43d..5645a203a7 100644
>> --- a/libavcodec/h264_refs.c
>> +++ b/libavcodec/h264_refs.c
>> @@ -718,6 +718,7 @@ int ff_h264_execute_ref_pic_marking(H264Context *h)
>> }
>> break;
>> case MMCO_RESET:
>> + default:
>> while (h->short_ref_count) {
>> remove_short(h, h->short_ref[0]->frame_num, 0);
>> }
>> @@ -730,7 +731,6 @@ int ff_h264_execute_ref_pic_marking(H264Context *h)
>> for (j = 0; j < MAX_DELAYED_PIC_COUNT; j++)
>> h->last_pocs[j] = INT_MIN;
>> break;
>> - default: assert(0);
>> }
>> }
>
> mmco[i].opcode should not be invalid, its checked around the point where
> this
> array is filled.
> unless there is something iam missing
Yes, you are missing big time.
If you think by "checked" about those nice asserts they are not enabled at all.
_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-devel mailing list
ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
