From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: <ffmpeg-devel-bounces@ffmpeg.org> Received: from ffbox0-bg.mplayerhq.hu (ffbox0-bg.ffmpeg.org [79.124.17.100]) by master.gitmailbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 637E747D4A for <ffmpegdev@gitmailbox.com>; Thu, 19 Oct 2023 17:42:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.1.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ffbox0-bg.mplayerhq.hu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 770CC68CAF9; Thu, 19 Oct 2023 20:42:38 +0300 (EEST) Received: from mail0.khirnov.net (red.khirnov.net [176.97.15.12]) by ffbox0-bg.mplayerhq.hu (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0F12068C9CD for <ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org>; Thu, 19 Oct 2023 20:42:32 +0300 (EEST) Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by mail0.khirnov.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id C2642240498 for <ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org>; Thu, 19 Oct 2023 19:42:31 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail0.khirnov.net ([IPv6:::1]) by localhost (mail0.khirnov.net [IPv6:::1]) (amavis, port 10024) with ESMTP id PDuGwDBbVLD6 for <ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org>; Thu, 19 Oct 2023 19:42:31 +0200 (CEST) Received: from lain.khirnov.net (lain.khirnov.net [IPv6:2001:67c:1138:4306::3]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "lain.khirnov.net", Issuer "smtp.khirnov.net SMTP CA" (verified OK)) by mail0.khirnov.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 201022400FF for <ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org>; Thu, 19 Oct 2023 19:42:31 +0200 (CEST) Received: by lain.khirnov.net (Postfix, from userid 1000) id EF0CD1601B9; Thu, 19 Oct 2023 19:42:30 +0200 (CEST) From: Anton Khirnov <anton@khirnov.net> To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches <ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org> In-Reply-To: <20231019163313.GH3543730@pb2> References: <20231015001323.1073-1-michael@niedermayer.cc> <169771381849.29037.11341794027795365044@lain.khirnov.net> <20231019163313.GH3543730@pb2> Mail-Followup-To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches <ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org> Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2023 19:42:30 +0200 Message-ID: <169773735094.30698.2006289459200607623@lain.khirnov.net> User-Agent: alot/0.8.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] avformat/mov: The iloc test is not redundant X-BeenThere: ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: FFmpeg development discussions and patches <ffmpeg-devel.ffmpeg.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/options/ffmpeg-devel>, <mailto:ffmpeg-devel-request@ffmpeg.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://ffmpeg.org/pipermail/ffmpeg-devel> List-Post: <mailto:ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org> List-Help: <mailto:ffmpeg-devel-request@ffmpeg.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel>, <mailto:ffmpeg-devel-request@ffmpeg.org?subject=subscribe> Reply-To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches <ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: ffmpeg-devel-bounces@ffmpeg.org Sender: "ffmpeg-devel" <ffmpeg-devel-bounces@ffmpeg.org> Archived-At: <https://master.gitmailbox.com/ffmpegdev/169773735094.30698.2006289459200607623@lain.khirnov.net/> List-Archive: <https://master.gitmailbox.com/ffmpegdev/> List-Post: <mailto:ffmpegdev@gitmailbox.com> Quoting Michael Niedermayer (2023-10-19 18:33:13) > On Thu, Oct 19, 2023 at 01:10:18PM +0200, Anton Khirnov wrote: > > Quoting Michael Niedermayer (2023-10-15 02:13:23) > > > Fixes: Assertion failure > > > Fixes: 62866/clusterfuzz-testcase-minimized-ffmpeg_dem_MOV_fuzzer-5282997370486784 > > > > > > Found-by: continuous fuzzing process https://github.com/google/oss-fuzz/tree/master/projects/ffmpeg > > > Signed-off-by: Michael Niedermayer <michael@niedermayer.cc> > > > --- > > > > The commit message is useless. > > This comment is also not that usefull > What would you like to see in the commit message ? > > The 2 checks are not redundant. Should the message detail how > the assertion failure occured ? At least two people previously thought that the condition is redundant, so it seems clear to me that an explanation is in order. I actually find it quite baffling that this is not obvious to you. Do you really think that "Fixes: Assertion failure" is sufficient explanation for anyone reading this patch? > Would you prefer if the 2nd condition produces an error instead of return 0 ? Maybe. Depending on the conditions under which this happens. -- Anton Khirnov _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email ffmpeg-devel-request@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".