From: Zhao Zhili <quinkblack-at-foxmail.com@ffmpeg.org> To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches <ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org> Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH v3] checkasm/h264dsp: Fix stack overflow in check_idct_dequant Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2025 19:49:25 +0800 Message-ID: <tencent_C37DD2AC8E3B5DC105B57469B201B56A4A0A@qq.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <GV1P250MB0737F9FB4796EF0FC28A9D468F70A@GV1P250MB0737.EURP250.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM> > On Jun 16, 2025, at 19:03, Andreas Rheinhardt <andreas.rheinhardt@outlook.com> wrote: > > Zhao Zhili: >> >> >>> On Jun 16, 2025, at 17:46, Andreas Rheinhardt <andreas.rheinhardt@outlook.com> wrote: >>> >>> Zhao Zhili: >>>> From: Zhao Zhili <zhilizhao@tencent.com> >>>> >>>> --- >>>> tests/checkasm/h264dsp.c | 20 +++++++++++++++----- >>>> 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/tests/checkasm/h264dsp.c b/tests/checkasm/h264dsp.c >>>> index f5f9650224..a0f8fd858a 100644 >>>> --- a/tests/checkasm/h264dsp.c >>>> +++ b/tests/checkasm/h264dsp.c >>>> @@ -328,25 +328,35 @@ static void check_idct_multiple(void) >>>> static void check_idct_dequant(void) >>>> { >>>> static const int depths[5] = { 8, 9, 10, 12, 14 }; >>>> - LOCAL_ALIGNED_16(int16_t, src, [16]); >>>> - /* Ensure dst buffers are large enough to hold dctcoefs of all bit-depths. */ >>>> + /* Ensure buffers are large enough to hold dctcoefs of all bit-depths. */ >>>> + LOCAL_ALIGNED_16(uint8_t, src_buf, [16 * sizeof(int32_t)]); >>>> LOCAL_ALIGNED_16(uint8_t, dst0, [16 * 16 * sizeof(int32_t)]); >>>> LOCAL_ALIGNED_16(uint8_t, dst1, [16 * 16 * sizeof(int32_t)]); >>>> + int16_t *src = (int16_t *)src_buf; >>>> int16_t *dst_ref = (int16_t *)dst0; >>>> int16_t *dst_new = (int16_t *)dst1; >>>> H264DSPContext h; >>>> int bit_depth, i, qmul; >>>> declare_func_emms(AV_CPU_FLAG_MMX | AV_CPU_FLAG_SSE2, void, int16_t *output, int16_t *input, int qmul); >>>> >>>> - for (int j = 0; j < 16; j++) >>>> - src[j] = (rnd() % 512) - 256; >>>> - >>>> qmul = rnd() % 4096; >>>> >>>> for (i = 0; i < FF_ARRAY_ELEMS(depths); i++) { >>>> bit_depth = depths[i]; >>>> ff_h264dsp_init(&h, bit_depth, 1); >>>> >>>> + if (bit_depth == 8) { >>>> + for (size_t j = 0; j < 16; j++) { >>>> + int16_t r = (rnd() % 512) - 256; >>>> + AV_WN16A(&src_buf[j << 1], r); >>>> + } >>>> + } else { >>>> + for (size_t j = 0; j < 16; j++) { >>>> + int32_t r = (rnd() % (1 << (bit_depth + 1))) - (1 << bit_depth); >>>> + AV_WN32A(&src_buf[j << 2], r); >>>> + } >>>> + } >>>> + >>>> memset(dst0, 0, 16 * 16 * SIZEOF_COEF); >>>> memset(dst1, 0, 16 * 16 * SIZEOF_COEF); >>>> >>> >>> This still has an effective-type violation: src_buf is of type uint8_t, >>> yet the ff_h264_luma_dc_dequant_idct functions will read it as >>> int16_t/int32_t. It also still has the downside that buffer overflows >>> for the 8bit case can go undetected. >> >> A bunch of template has cast like >> >> pixel *dst = (pixel *)_dst; >> const pixel *src = (const pixel *)_src; >> >> then read and write as int16_t. >> >> And a bunch of checkasm use uint8_t[] array on stack as src and dst, >> which leading to UB. >> >> This patch isn’t specific. And this patch add zero UB (it’s there before the patch, >> both src and dst are accessed as int32_t/int16_t while they are int16_t and uint8_t). >> > > This patch adds UB: src was int16_t before, so that the accesses in the > eight bit function were fine, but are not with this patch. Anyway, it is > irrelevant now. Why it suddenly becomes a big problem access to properly aligned uint8_t *? I don’t mind to discuss the rules regarding to these violating of strict aliasing, especially in checkasm. But why it suddenly becomes a rule blocking a patch trying to fix a fate failure. I don’t buy the reason "the accesses in the eight bit function were fine”. > > - Andreas > > _______________________________________________ > 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". _______________________________________________ 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".
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-06-16 11:49 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2025-06-16 9:40 Zhao Zhili 2025-06-16 9:46 ` Andreas Rheinhardt 2025-06-16 10:21 ` Zhao Zhili 2025-06-16 11:03 ` Andreas Rheinhardt 2025-06-16 11:49 ` Zhao Zhili [this message] 2025-06-16 18:29 ` Andreas Rheinhardt 2025-06-17 2:01 ` Zhao Zhili
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=tencent_C37DD2AC8E3B5DC105B57469B201B56A4A0A@qq.com \ --to=quinkblack-at-foxmail.com@ffmpeg.org \ --cc=ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Git Inbox Mirror of the ffmpeg-devel mailing list - see https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel This inbox may be cloned and mirrored by anyone: git clone --mirror https://master.gitmailbox.com/ffmpegdev/0 ffmpegdev/git/0.git # If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may # initialize and index your mirror using the following commands: public-inbox-init -V2 ffmpegdev ffmpegdev/ https://master.gitmailbox.com/ffmpegdev \ ffmpegdev@gitmailbox.com public-inbox-index ffmpegdev Example config snippet for mirrors. AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/public-inbox.git