[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] avcodec/snowdec: Check intra block dc differences.

[James Almer]

On 9/4/2017 3:16 PM, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 04, 2017 at 02:36:45PM -0300, James Almer wrote:
>> On 9/4/2017 2:23 PM, wm4 wrote:
>>> On Mon,  4 Sep 2017 18:11:44 +0200
>>> Michael Niedermayer <michael at niedermayer.cc> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Fixes: Timeout
>>>> Fixes: 3142/clusterfuzz-testcase-5007853163118592
>>>>
>>>> Found-by: continuous fuzzing process https://github.com/google/oss-fuzz/tree/master/projects/ffmpeg
>>>> Signed-off-by: Michael Niedermayer <michael at niedermayer.cc>
>>>
>>> Wasn't this patch rejected before?
>>
>> Ronald rejected the previous version because of the obscure error
>> messages. I suggested an alternative and Michael sent a new patch
>> following it.
>>
>> If this is also not ok then please say so. That way the error messages
>> can be removed before pushing the patch and we can go back to focus on
>> things worth discussing.
>>
> 
>>>
>>> Can't we just remove this codec? It has no use other than causing
>>> potential security issues and maintenance.
>>
>> I agree about removing the encoder, but the decoder is needed for
>> existing streams. Unless everyone just argues it has no real world
>> samples for being an avcodec-only toy codec.
>>
>> If you send a patch removing the encoder without also trying to remove
>> all the things that currently depend on it (One or two filters i think)
>> then I'll +1 it. ffv1 and mpeg4 encoders are enough for any kind of
>> testing, fate or otherwise, that might require a native encoder.
> 
> I find it a bit offensive that people suggest to remove the encoder i
> maintain.

Sending a patch to remove something can mean the start of a discussion,
and not that it will be inevitably applied.
If you don't agree with it you can argue against the patch. It's what
has happened plenty of times (There were like three attempts to remove
libmpcodecs each with its own patch before it was finally accepted by
everyone). So please, don't be offended. I'm sure plenty of people think
the redspark demuxer is a waste of bits and I wouldn't find it odd if
someone sends a patch to purge it. I would if anything argue against its
removal.

Also, this all is assuming wm4 actually sends a patch for this purpose.