James Almer:
> On 5/2/2024 6:05 AM, Andreas Rheinhardt wrote:
>> Hendrik Leppkes:
>>> On Thu, May 2, 2024 at 10:22 AM Andreas Rheinhardt
>>> <andreas.rheinhardt at outlook.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Before 0f8763fbea4e8816cd54c2a481d4c048fec58394, av1_frame_ref()
>>>> and update_reference_list() could fail and therefore needed to
>>>> be checked, which incidentally set ret. This is no longer happening,
>>>> leading to a potential use of an uninitialized value which is
>>>> also the subject of Coverity ticket #1596605.
>>>>
>>>> Fix this by always setting ret before goto end; do not return
>>>> some random ancient value.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Andreas Rheinhardt <andreas.rheinhardt at outlook.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> libavcodec/av1dec.c | 12 ++++++++++--
>>>> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/libavcodec/av1dec.c b/libavcodec/av1dec.c
>>>> index 79a30a114d..c3f255a29a 100644
>>>> --- a/libavcodec/av1dec.c
>>>> +++ b/libavcodec/av1dec.c
>>>> @@ -1335,6 +1335,12 @@ static int
>>>> av1_receive_frame_internal(AVCodecContext *avctx, AVFrame *frame)
>>>> ret = set_output_frame(avctx, frame);
>>>> if (ret < 0)
>>>> av_log(avctx, AV_LOG_ERROR, "Set output
>>>> frame error.\n");
>>>> + } else {
>>>> + // CBS checks for us that the frame to be shown
>>>> actually existed
>>>> + // in the bitstream; if it doesn't it could be
>>>> e.g. due to
>>>> + // skip_frame setting. Return EAGAIN to
>>>> indicate that we are
>>>> + // currently unable to produce output.
>>>> + ret = AVERROR(EAGAIN);
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>
>>> In the vein of this comment, set_output_frame will also return 0
>>> without returning a frame in some cases - eg. with multiple layers.
>>> Should this equally return EAGAIN rather than claiming success without
>>> a frame?
>>>
>>
>> Thanks for pointing this out. There is a translation 0->AVERROR(EAGAIN)
>> at the end of this function if the output frame is unset. Maybe this
>> commit should rather set ret to 0 and rely on this (as it was before
>> 0f8763fbea)? Let's hear what James says about this.
>
> Yes, i prefer that.
I already send a v2 that does this.
- Andreas