Quantcast

'ff_h264_handle_aggregated_packet' does not match original declaration

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
12 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

'ff_h264_handle_aggregated_packet' does not match original declaration

Reindl Harald
i guess that should be fixed somehow as well as -Wmisleading-indentation
is a clearly warning sign - at the bottom also a lot of dead code which
maybe only get visible when building with LTO
___________________________________________________

src/libavformat/rtpdec_formats.h:41:5: warning: type of
'ff_h264_handle_aggregated_packet' does not match original declaration
[-Wlto-type-mismatch]
  int ff_h264_handle_aggregated_packet(AVFormatContext *ctx,
PayloadContext *data, AVPacket *pkt,
      ^
src/libavformat/rtpdec_h264.c:206:5: note:
'ff_h264_handle_aggregated_packet' was previously declared here
  int ff_h264_handle_aggregated_packet(AVFormatContext *ctx,
PayloadContext *data, AVPacket *pkt,
      ^
src/libavformat/rtpdec_h264.c:206:5: note: code may be misoptimized
unless -fno-strict-aliasing is used
LD      libavfilter/libavfilter.so.6
___________________________________________________

src/libavcodec/qdm2.c: In function 'fill_coding_method_array':
src/libavcodec/qdm2.c:539:9: warning: this 'for' clause does not
guard... [-Wmisleading-indentation]
          for (ch = 0; ch < nb_channels; ch++)
          ^~~
src/libavcodec/qdm2.c:568:13: note: ...this statement, but the latter is
misleadingly indented as if it is guarded by the 'for'
              acc = 0;
              ^~~

src/libavcodec/mpegvideo.c: In function 'ff_mpv_common_init':
src/libavcodec/mpegvideo.c:940:5: warning: this 'if' clause does not
guard... [-Wmisleading-indentation]
      if (!s->new_picture.f)
      ^~
src/libavcodec/mpegvideo.c:943:9: note: ...this statement, but the
latter is misleadingly indented as if it is guarded by the 'if'
          if (init_context_frame(s))
          ^~
src/libavcodec/mpegvideo.c:960:17: warning: this 'if' clause does not
guard... [-Wmisleading-indentation]
                  if (init_duplicate_context(s->thread_context[i]) < 0)
                  ^~
src/libavcodec/mpegvideo.c:962:21: note: ...this statement, but the
latter is misleadingly indented as if it is guarded by the 'if'
                      s->thread_context[i]->start_mb_y =
                      ^
src/libavcodec/mpegvideo.c: In function 'ff_mpv_common_frame_size_change':
src/libavcodec/mpegvideo.c:1091:17: warning: this 'if' clause does not
guard... [-Wmisleading-indentation]
                  if ((err =
init_duplicate_context(s->thread_context[i])) < 0)
                  ^~
src/libavcodec/mpegvideo.c:1093:21: note: ...this statement, but the
latter is misleadingly indented as if it is guarded by the 'if'
                      s->thread_context[i]->start_mb_y =
                      ^
CC      libavcodec/mpl2dec.o
src/libavcodec/mpegvideo_enc.c: In function 'encode_frame':
src/libavcodec/mpegvideo_enc.c:1400:5: warning: 'avcodec_encode_video2'
is deprecated [-Wdeprecated-declarations]
      ret = avcodec_encode_video2(c, &pkt, frame, &got_output);
      ^~~
In file included from src/libavcodec/mpegvideo_enc.c:42:0:
src/libavcodec/avcodec.h:5261:5: note: declared here
  int avcodec_encode_video2(AVCodecContext *avctx, AVPacket *avpkt,
      ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

src/libavcodec/ivi_dsp.c: In function 'ff_ivi_inverse_slant_8x8':
src/libavcodec/ivi_dsp.c:552:11: warning: this 'else' clause does not
guard... [-Wmisleading-indentation]
          } else
            ^~~~
src/libavcodec/ivi_dsp.c:555:13: note: ...this statement, but the latter
is misleadingly indented as if it is guarded by the 'else'
              src++;
              ^~~
src/libavcodec/ivi_dsp.c: In function 'ff_ivi_inverse_slant_4x4':
src/libavcodec/ivi_dsp.c:592:11: warning: this 'else' clause does not
guard... [-Wmisleading-indentation]
          } else
            ^~~~
src/libavcodec/ivi_dsp.c:595:13: note: ...this statement, but the latter
is misleadingly indented as if it is guarded by the 'else'
              src++;
              ^~~
___________________________________________________

src/libavcodec/h264_slice.c: In function 'ff_h264_decode_slice_header':
src/libavcodec/h264_slice.c:1188:19: warning: assignment discards
'const' qualifier from pointer target type [-Wdiscarded-qualifiers]
          h->ps.sps = (const SPS*)h->ps.sps_ref->data;
                    ^

src/libavcodec/utils.c: In function 'avcodec_encode_audio2':
src/libavcodec/utils.c:1891:13: warning: 'av_dup_packet' is deprecated
[-Wdeprecated-declarations]
              if (av_dup_packet(avpkt) < 0) {
              ^~
In file included from src/libavcodec/utils.c:46:0:
src/libavcodec/avcodec.h:4391:5: note: declared here
  int av_dup_packet(AVPacket *pkt);
      ^~~~~~~~~~~~~
src/libavcodec/utils.c: In function 'avcodec_encode_video2':
src/libavcodec/utils.c:1985:13: warning: 'av_dup_packet' is deprecated
[-Wdeprecated-declarations]
              if (av_dup_packet(avpkt) < 0) {
              ^~
In file included from src/libavcodec/utils.c:46:0:
src/libavcodec/avcodec.h:4391:5: note: declared here
  int av_dup_packet(AVPacket *pkt);
      ^~~~~~~~~~~~~
src/libavcodec/utils.c: In function 'avcodec_decode_video2':
src/libavcodec/utils.c:2212:26: warning: assignment discards 'const'
qualifier from pointer target type [-Wdiscarded-qualifiers]
      avctx->internal->pkt = avpkt;
                           ^
src/libavcodec/utils.c:2213:37: warning: passing argument 2 of
'apply_param_change' discards 'const' qualifier from pointer target type
[-Wdiscarded-qualifiers]
      ret = apply_param_change(avctx, avpkt);
                                      ^~~~~
src/libavcodec/utils.c:2063:12: note: expected 'AVPacket * {aka struct
AVPacket *}' but argument is of type 'const AVPacket * {aka const struct
AVPacket *}'
  static int apply_param_change(AVCodecContext *avctx, AVPacket *avpkt)
             ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
src/libavcodec/utils.c: In function 'do_decode':
src/libavcodec/utils.c:2741:9: warning: 'avcodec_decode_video2' is
deprecated [-Wdeprecated-declarations]
          ret = avcodec_decode_video2(avctx, avctx->internal->buffer_frame,
          ^~~
src/libavcodec/utils.c:2187:25: note: declared here
  int attribute_align_arg avcodec_decode_video2(AVCodecContext *avctx,
AVFrame *picture,
                          ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
src/libavcodec/utils.c:2746:9: warning: 'avcodec_decode_audio4' is
deprecated [-Wdeprecated-declarations]
          ret = avcodec_decode_audio4(avctx, avctx->internal->buffer_frame,
          ^~~
src/libavcodec/utils.c:2288:25: note: declared here
  int attribute_align_arg avcodec_decode_audio4(AVCodecContext *avctx,
                          ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
src/libavcodec/utils.c: In function 'do_encode':
src/libavcodec/utils.c:2882:9: warning: 'avcodec_encode_video2' is
deprecated [-Wdeprecated-declarations]
          ret = avcodec_encode_video2(avctx, avctx->internal->buffer_pkt,
          ^~~
src/libavcodec/utils.c:1929:25: note: declared here
  int attribute_align_arg avcodec_encode_video2(AVCodecContext *avctx,
                          ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
src/libavcodec/utils.c:2885:9: warning: 'avcodec_encode_audio2' is
deprecated [-Wdeprecated-declarations]
          ret = avcodec_encode_audio2(avctx, avctx->internal->buffer_pkt,
          ^~~
src/libavcodec/utils.c:1783:25: note: declared here
  int attribute_align_arg avcodec_encode_audio2(AVCodecContext *avctx,

___________________________________________________

In file included from src/libavcodec/x86/hpeldsp_init.c:30:0:
src/libavcodec/x86/hpeldsp_init.c:173:20: warning:
'avg_approx_pixels16_xy2_3dnow' defined but not used [-Wunused-function]
      CALL_2X_PIXELS(avg_approx_pixels16_xy2## CPUEXT,
ff_avg_approx_pixels8_xy2## CPUEXT, 8)
                     ^
src/libavcodec/pixels.h:27:13: note: in definition of macro
'CALL_2X_PIXELS_MACRO'
  STATIC void a(uint8_t *block, const uint8_t *pixels, \
              ^
src/libavcodec/x86/hpeldsp_init.c:173:5: note: in expansion of macro
'CALL_2X_PIXELS'
      CALL_2X_PIXELS(avg_approx_pixels16_xy2## CPUEXT,
ff_avg_approx_pixels8_xy2## CPUEXT, 8)
      ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~
src/libavcodec/x86/hpeldsp_init.c:175:1: note: in expansion of macro
'HPELDSP_AVG_PIXELS16'
  HPELDSP_AVG_PIXELS16(_3dnow)
  ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
src/libavcodec/x86/hpeldsp_init.c:172:20: warning:
'avg_pixels16_xy2_3dnow' defined but not used [-Wunused-function]
      CALL_2X_PIXELS(avg_pixels16_xy2       ## CPUEXT,
ff_avg_pixels8_xy2       ## CPUEXT, 8) \
                     ^
src/libavcodec/pixels.h:27:13: note: in definition of macro
'CALL_2X_PIXELS_MACRO'
  STATIC void a(uint8_t *block, const uint8_t *pixels, \
              ^
src/libavcodec/x86/hpeldsp_init.c:172:5: note: in expansion of macro
'CALL_2X_PIXELS'
      CALL_2X_PIXELS(avg_pixels16_xy2       ## CPUEXT,
ff_avg_pixels8_xy2       ## CPUEXT, 8) \
      ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~
src/libavcodec/x86/hpeldsp_init.c:175:1: note: in expansion of macro
'HPELDSP_AVG_PIXELS16'
  HPELDSP_AVG_PIXELS16(_3dnow)
  ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
src/libavcodec/x86/hpeldsp_init.c:171:20: warning:
'avg_pixels16_y2_3dnow' defined but not used [-Wunused-function]
      CALL_2X_PIXELS(avg_pixels16_y2        ## CPUEXT, ff_avg_pixels8_y2
        ## CPUEXT, 8) \
                     ^
src/libavcodec/pixels.h:27:13: note: in definition of macro
'CALL_2X_PIXELS_MACRO'
  STATIC void a(uint8_t *block, const uint8_t *pixels, \
              ^
src/libavcodec/x86/hpeldsp_init.c:171:5: note: in expansion of macro
'CALL_2X_PIXELS'
      CALL_2X_PIXELS(avg_pixels16_y2        ## CPUEXT, ff_avg_pixels8_y2
        ## CPUEXT, 8) \
      ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~
src/libavcodec/x86/hpeldsp_init.c:175:1: note: in expansion of macro
'HPELDSP_AVG_PIXELS16'
  HPELDSP_AVG_PIXELS16(_3dnow)
  ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
src/libavcodec/x86/hpeldsp_init.c:170:20: warning:
'avg_pixels16_x2_3dnow' defined but not used [-Wunused-function]
      CALL_2X_PIXELS(avg_pixels16_x2        ## CPUEXT, ff_avg_pixels8_x2
        ## CPUEXT, 8) \
                     ^
src/libavcodec/pixels.h:27:13: note: in definition of macro
'CALL_2X_PIXELS_MACRO'
  STATIC void a(uint8_t *block, const uint8_t *pixels, \
              ^
src/libavcodec/x86/hpeldsp_init.c:170:5: note: in expansion of macro
'CALL_2X_PIXELS'
      CALL_2X_PIXELS(avg_pixels16_x2        ## CPUEXT, ff_avg_pixels8_x2
        ## CPUEXT, 8) \
      ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~
src/libavcodec/x86/hpeldsp_init.c:175:1: note: in expansion of macro
'HPELDSP_AVG_PIXELS16'
  HPELDSP_AVG_PIXELS16(_3dnow)
  ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
src/libavcodec/x86/hpeldsp_init.c:169:20: warning: 'avg_pixels16_3dnow'
defined but not used [-Wunused-function]
      CALL_2X_PIXELS(avg_pixels16           ## CPUEXT, ff_avg_pixels8
        ## CPUEXT, 8) \
                     ^
src/libavcodec/pixels.h:27:13: note: in definition of macro
'CALL_2X_PIXELS_MACRO'
  STATIC void a(uint8_t *block, const uint8_t *pixels, \
              ^
src/libavcodec/x86/hpeldsp_init.c:169:5: note: in expansion of macro
'CALL_2X_PIXELS'
      CALL_2X_PIXELS(avg_pixels16           ## CPUEXT, ff_avg_pixels8
        ## CPUEXT, 8) \
      ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~
src/libavcodec/x86/hpeldsp_init.c:175:1: note: in expansion of macro
'HPELDSP_AVG_PIXELS16'
  HPELDSP_AVG_PIXELS16(_3dnow)
  ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
src/libavcodec/x86/hpeldsp_init.c:168:20: warning:
'put_no_rnd_pixels16_y2_3dnow' defined but not used [-Wunused-function]
      CALL_2X_PIXELS(put_no_rnd_pixels16_y2 ## CPUEXT,
ff_put_no_rnd_pixels8_y2 ## CPUEXT, 8) \
                     ^
src/libavcodec/pixels.h:27:13: note: in definition of macro
'CALL_2X_PIXELS_MACRO'
  STATIC void a(uint8_t *block, const uint8_t *pixels, \
              ^
src/libavcodec/x86/hpeldsp_init.c:168:5: note: in expansion of macro
'CALL_2X_PIXELS'
      CALL_2X_PIXELS(put_no_rnd_pixels16_y2 ## CPUEXT,
ff_put_no_rnd_pixels8_y2 ## CPUEXT, 8) \
      ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~
src/libavcodec/x86/hpeldsp_init.c:175:1: note: in expansion of macro
'HPELDSP_AVG_PIXELS16'
  HPELDSP_AVG_PIXELS16(_3dnow)
  ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
src/libavcodec/x86/hpeldsp_init.c:167:20: warning:
'put_pixels16_y2_3dnow' defined but not used [-Wunused-function]
      CALL_2X_PIXELS(put_pixels16_y2        ## CPUEXT, ff_put_pixels8_y2
        ## CPUEXT, 8) \
                     ^
src/libavcodec/pixels.h:27:13: note: in definition of macro
'CALL_2X_PIXELS_MACRO'
  STATIC void a(uint8_t *block, const uint8_t *pixels, \
              ^
src/libavcodec/x86/hpeldsp_init.c:167:5: note: in expansion of macro
'CALL_2X_PIXELS'
      CALL_2X_PIXELS(put_pixels16_y2        ## CPUEXT, ff_put_pixels8_y2
        ## CPUEXT, 8) \
      ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~
src/libavcodec/x86/hpeldsp_init.c:175:1: note: in expansion of macro
'HPELDSP_AVG_PIXELS16'
  HPELDSP_AVG_PIXELS16(_3dnow)
  ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
src/libavcodec/x86/hpeldsp_init.c:166:20: warning:
'put_no_rnd_pixels16_x2_3dnow' defined but not used [-Wunused-function]
      CALL_2X_PIXELS(put_no_rnd_pixels16_x2 ## CPUEXT,
ff_put_no_rnd_pixels8_x2 ## CPUEXT, 8) \
                     ^
src/libavcodec/pixels.h:27:13: note: in definition of macro
'CALL_2X_PIXELS_MACRO'
  STATIC void a(uint8_t *block, const uint8_t *pixels, \
              ^
src/libavcodec/x86/hpeldsp_init.c:166:5: note: in expansion of macro
'CALL_2X_PIXELS'
      CALL_2X_PIXELS(put_no_rnd_pixels16_x2 ## CPUEXT,
ff_put_no_rnd_pixels8_x2 ## CPUEXT, 8) \
      ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~
src/libavcodec/x86/hpeldsp_init.c:175:1: note: in expansion of macro
'HPELDSP_AVG_PIXELS16'
  HPELDSP_AVG_PIXELS16(_3dnow)
  ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

src/libavcodec/tdsc.c: In function 'tdsc_decode_jpeg_tile':
src/libavcodec/tdsc.c:354:5: warning: 'avcodec_decode_video2' is
deprecated [-Wdeprecated-declarations]
      ret = avcodec_decode_video2(ctx->jpeg_avctx, ctx->jpgframe,
      ^~~
In file included from src/libavcodec/tdsc.c:41:0:
src/libavcodec/avcodec.h:4753:5: note: declared here
  int avcodec_decode_video2(AVCodecContext *avctx, AVFrame *picture,

src/libavcodec/snowenc.c: In function 'encode_frame':
src/libavcodec/snowenc.c:1646:5: warning: 'coded_frame' is deprecated
[-Wdeprecated-declarations]
      av_frame_unref(avctx->coded_frame);
      ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~
In file included from src/libavcodec/snowenc.c:25:0:
src/libavcodec/avcodec.h:3070:35: note: declared here
      attribute_deprecated AVFrame *coded_frame;
                                    ^~~~~~~~~~~
src/libavcodec/snowenc.c:1647:5: warning: 'coded_frame' is deprecated
[-Wdeprecated-declarations]
      ret = av_frame_ref(avctx->coded_frame, s->current_picture);
      ^~~
In file included from src/libavcodec/snowenc.c:25:0:
src/libavcodec/avcodec.h:3070:35: note: declared here
      attribute_deprecated AVFrame *coded_frame;
                                    ^~~~~~~~~~~
src/libavcodec/snowenc.c:1677:9: warning: 'me_method' is deprecated
[-Wdeprecated-declarations]
          s->m.me_method= s->avctx->me_method;
          ^
In file included from src/libavcodec/snowenc.c:25:0:
src/libavcodec/avcodec.h:1884:30: note: declared here
      attribute_deprecated int me_method;
                               ^~~~~~~~~
src/libavcodec/snowenc.c:1879:5: warning: 'frame_bits' is deprecated
[-Wdeprecated-declarations]
      avctx->frame_bits = s->m.frame_bits;
      ^~~~~
In file included from src/libavcodec/snowenc.c:25:0:
src/libavcodec/avcodec.h:2809:9: note: declared here
      int frame_bits;
          ^~~~~~~~~~
src/libavcodec/snowenc.c:1880:5: warning: 'mv_bits' is deprecated
[-Wdeprecated-declarations]
      avctx->mv_bits = s->m.mv_bits;
      ^~~~~
In file included from src/libavcodec/snowenc.c:25:0:
src/libavcodec/avcodec.h:2791:9: note: declared here
      int mv_bits;
          ^~~~~~~
src/libavcodec/snowenc.c:1881:5: warning: 'misc_bits' is deprecated
[-Wdeprecated-declarations]
      avctx->misc_bits = s->m.misc_bits;
      ^~~~~
In file included from src/libavcodec/snowenc.c:25:0:
src/libavcodec/avcodec.h:2805:9: note: declared here
      int misc_bits;
          ^~~~~~~~~
src/libavcodec/snowenc.c:1882:5: warning: 'p_tex_bits' is deprecated
[-Wdeprecated-declarations]
      avctx->p_tex_bits = s->m.p_tex_bits;
      ^~~~~
In file included from src/libavcodec/snowenc.c:25:0:
src/libavcodec/avcodec.h:2797:9: note: declared here
      int p_tex_bits;
src/libavcodec/smvjpegdec.c: In function 'smvjpeg_decode_frame':
src/libavcodec/smvjpegdec.c:162:9: warning: 'avcodec_decode_video2' is
deprecated [-Wdeprecated-declarations]
          ret = avcodec_decode_video2(s->avctx, mjpeg_data,
&s->mjpeg_data_size, avpkt);
          ^~~
In file included from src/libavcodec/smvjpegdec.c:28:0:
src/libavcodec/avcodec.h:4753:5: note: declared here
  int avcodec_decode_video2(AVCodecContext *avctx, AVFrame *picture,
      ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-user mailing list
[hidden email]
http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-user

To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email
[hidden email] with subject "unsubscribe".
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: 'ff_h264_handle_aggregated_packet' does not match original declaration

Carl Eugen Hoyos-2
2017-02-11 23:07 GMT+01:00 Reindl Harald <[hidden email]>:
> i guess that should be fixed somehow as well as -Wmisleading-indentation
> is a clearly warning sign - at the bottom also a lot of dead code which
> maybe only get visible when building with LTO

Since I cannot reproduce the first two issues:
Could you confirm that you tested current FFmpeg git head, the only
version supported on this mailing list due to the available manpower?

Carl Eugen
_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-user mailing list
[hidden email]
http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-user

To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email
[hidden email] with subject "unsubscribe".
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: 'ff_h264_handle_aggregated_packet' does not match original declaration

Reindl Harald


Am 12.02.2017 um 00:37 schrieb Carl Eugen Hoyos:
> 2017-02-11 23:07 GMT+01:00 Reindl Harald <[hidden email]>:
>> i guess that should be fixed somehow as well as -Wmisleading-indentation
>> is a clearly warning sign - at the bottom also a lot of dead code which
>> maybe only get visible when building with LTO
>
> Since I cannot reproduce the first two issues:
> Could you confirm that you tested current FFmpeg git head, the only
> version supported on this mailing list due to the available manpower?

that warnings exists for a long time

did you compile with link-time-optimization as you can clearly see it's
lto warning
_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-user mailing list
[hidden email]
http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-user

To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email
[hidden email] with subject "unsubscribe".
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: 'ff_h264_handle_aggregated_packet' does not match original declaration

Reindl Harald


Am 12.02.2017 um 03:18 schrieb Reindl Harald:

>
>
> Am 12.02.2017 um 00:37 schrieb Carl Eugen Hoyos:
>> 2017-02-11 23:07 GMT+01:00 Reindl Harald <[hidden email]>:
>>> i guess that should be fixed somehow as well as -Wmisleading-indentation
>>> is a clearly warning sign - at the bottom also a lot of dead code which
>>> maybe only get visible when building with LTO
>>
>> Since I cannot reproduce the first two issues:
>> Could you confirm that you tested current FFmpeg git head, the only
>> version supported on this mailing list due to the available manpower?
>
> that warnings exists for a long time
>
> did you compile with link-time-optimization as you can clearly see it's
> lto warning

and please refrain from discuss each and every parameter this time, this
is a rpmbuild and it's fine how it works inclduing override rpm-macros :-)

gcc-6.3.1-1.fc24.x86_64
gcc-c++-6.3.1-1.fc24.x86_64
libgcc-6.3.1-1.fc24.x86_64

./configure --prefix=/usr --bindir=/usr/bin --datadir=/usr/share/ffmpeg
--incdir=/usr/include/ffmpeg --libdir=/usr/lib64 --mandir=/usr/share/man
'--extra-cflags=-m64 -O2 -g0 -march=sandybridge -mtune=sandybridge -mavx
-mfpmath=sse -msse2avx -fopenmp -pipe -fno-strict-aliasing
-fomit-frame-pointer -fexceptions -fstack-protector-strong
--param=ssp-buffer-size=6 -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -Wstack-protector -Wformat
-Werror=format-security -Ofast -ffast-math -funsafe-math-optimizations
-Wno-pointer-sign -minline-all-stringops -fno-strict-aliasing -flto
-fno-fat-lto-objects -fuse-ld=gold -fuse-linker-plugin'
'--extra-ldflags=-Wl,-z,now -Wl,-z,relro -Wl,-z,noexecstack -m64 -O2 -g0
-march=sandybridge -mtune=sandybridge -mavx -mfpmath=sse -msse2avx
-fopenmp -pipe -fno-strict-aliasing -fomit-frame-pointer -fexceptions
-fstack-protector-strong --param=ssp-buffer-size=6 -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2
-Wstack-protector -Wformat -Werror=format-security -Ofast -ffast-math
-funsafe-math-optimizations -Wno-pointer-sign -minline-all-stringops
-fno-strict-aliasing -flto -fno-fat-lto-objects -fuse-ld=gold
-fuse-linker-plugin' --enable-lto --ar=gcc-ar --ranlib=true
--extra-version=thelounge.net --enable-nonfree --enable-gpl
--enable-version3 --enable-libgsm --enable-libmp3lame --enable-libtheora
--enable-libx264 --enable-libx265 --enable-libvpx --enable-libfreetype
--enable-libopus --enable-openssl --enable-pic --enable-shared
--enable-runtime-cpudetect --enable-vdpau --disable-libvorbis
--disable-libxvid --disable-libfaac --disable-libopencore-amrnb
--disable-libopencore-amrwb --disable-libopenjpeg --disable-librtmp
--disable-libschroedinger --disable-libopencv --disable-programs
--disable-static --disable-libspeex --disable-amd3dnow
--disable-amd3dnowext --disable-protocol=gopher --disable-debug
--disable-doc --shlibdir=/usr/lib64
_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-user mailing list
[hidden email]
http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-user

To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email
[hidden email] with subject "unsubscribe".
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: 'ff_h264_handle_aggregated_packet' does not match original declaration

Carl Eugen Hoyos-2
2017-02-12 3:23 GMT+01:00 Reindl Harald <[hidden email]>:

> gcc-6.3.1-1.fc24.x86_64

gcc.gnu.org doesn't know this release;-)

Anyway: Please understand that several hundred real, user-reported,
reproducible bugs exist in current FFmpeg, some of them regressions.
I hope you agree that compiler bugs are not our priority...
(It's bad enough that we have to invest time in "undefined behaviour"
where no compiler ever failed.)

That's apart from the fact that --extra-cflags and --extra-ldflags
generally make bug reports invalid (as you correctly indicated)
except for paths and libraries.

Carl Eugen
_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-user mailing list
[hidden email]
http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-user

To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email
[hidden email] with subject "unsubscribe".
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: 'ff_h264_handle_aggregated_packet' does not match original declaration

Reindl Harald


Am 12.02.2017 um 03:30 schrieb Carl Eugen Hoyos:

> 2017-02-12 3:23 GMT+01:00 Reindl Harald <[hidden email]>:
>
>> gcc-6.3.1-1.fc24.x86_64
>
> gcc.gnu.org doesn't know this release;-)
>
> Anyway: Please understand that several hundred real, user-reported,
> reproducible bugs exist in current FFmpeg, some of them regressions.
> I hope you agree that compiler bugs are not our priority...
> (It's bad enough that we have to invest time in "undefined behaviour"
> where no compiler ever failed.)

no i do *not* agree beause some some of that warnings may the reason for
unfixed bugs, things like "src/libavcodec/mpegvideo.c:960:17: warning:
this 'if' clause does not guard... [-Wmisleading-indentation]" are a
clear indication that this code should be reviewed

and to be frankly where i develop software (though not in C/C++ but that
don't matter) i first keep my house clean and fix any warnings software
can detected automatically and *then* consider to waste my time trying
to reprodce things which could have been gone by get rid of all the code
smell

> That's apart from the fact that --extra-cflags and --extra-ldflags
> generally make bug reports invalid (as you correctly indicated)
> except for paths and libraries

you still refused to answer my question if you did a LTO build as you
pretended you can't reporduce it, as you always request full input of
ffmpeg command lines why don't you do the same?

src/libavformat/rtpdec_formats.h:41:5: warning: type of
'ff_h264_handle_aggregated_packet' does not match original declaration
[-Wlto-type-mismatch]
  int ff_h264_handle_aggregated_packet(AVFormatContext *ctx,
PayloadContext *data, AVPacket *pkt,
      ^
src/libavformat/rtpdec_h264.c:206:5: note:
'ff_h264_handle_aggregated_packet' was previously declared here
  int ff_h264_handle_aggregated_packet(AVFormatContext *ctx,
PayloadContext *data, AVPacket *pkt,
      ^
src/libavformat/rtpdec_h264.c:206:5: note: code may be misoptimized
unless -fno-strict-aliasing is used
LD      libavfilter/libavfilter.so.6
_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-user mailing list
[hidden email]
http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-user

To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email
[hidden email] with subject "unsubscribe".
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: 'ff_h264_handle_aggregated_packet' does not match original declaration

Carl Eugen Hoyos-2
2017-02-12 5:36 GMT+01:00 Reindl Harald <[hidden email]>:

>
> Am 12.02.2017 um 03:30 schrieb Carl Eugen Hoyos:
>>
>> 2017-02-12 3:23 GMT+01:00 Reindl Harald <[hidden email]>:
>>
>>> gcc-6.3.1-1.fc24.x86_64
>>
>> gcc.gnu.org doesn't know this release;-)
>>
>> Anyway: Please understand that several hundred real, user-reported,
>> reproducible bugs exist in current FFmpeg, some of them regressions.
>> I hope you agree that compiler bugs are not our priority...
>> (It's bad enough that we have to invest time in "undefined behaviour"
>> where no compiler ever failed.)
>
> no i do *not* agree beause some some of that warnings may the
> reason for unfixed bugs

I wonder what "may" means here...

> things like "src/libavcodec/mpegvideo.c:960:17: warning: this
> 'if' clause does not guard... [-Wmisleading-indentation]" are a clear
> indication that this code should be reviewed

Please do;-)

> and to be frankly where i develop software (though not in C/C++ but that
> don't matter) i first keep my house clean and fix any warnings software can

Sounds as if we found a new contributor - welcome!

> detected automatically and *then* consider to waste my time trying to
> reprodce things which could have been gone by get rid of all the code smell

It's funny that you wrote this mail a few hours after I fixed most
of the current warnings - or "several" if you prefer.
(Yes, we do exactly what you ask for, I just request that you realize
fixing these warnings practically never fixes a real issue, while we
know about many - ! - real issues including remote DOS, regressions
on valid input files and sometimes subtle change of behaviour, both
intended and unintended.)

>> That's apart from the fact that --extra-cflags and --extra-ldflags
>> generally make bug reports invalid (as you correctly indicated)
>> except for paths and libraries
>
> you still refused to answer my question if you did a LTO build as you

(You refused to answer my question.)

> pretended you can't reporduce it, as you always request full input
> of ffmpeg command lines why don't you do the same?

I was hoping my original comment made it crystal-clear that I did
try to reproduce the issues you saw.

> src/libavformat/rtpdec_formats.h:41:5: warning: type of
> 'ff_h264_handle_aggregated_packet' does not match original declaration
> [-Wlto-type-mismatch]
>  int ff_h264_handle_aggregated_packet(AVFormatContext *ctx, PayloadContext
> *data, AVPacket *pkt,
>      ^
> src/libavformat/rtpdec_h264.c:206:5: note:
> 'ff_h264_handle_aggregated_packet' was previously declared here
>  int ff_h264_handle_aggregated_packet(AVFormatContext *ctx, PayloadContext
> *data, AVPacket *pkt,
>      ^
> src/libavformat/rtpdec_h264.c:206:5: note: code may be misoptimized unless
> -fno-strict-aliasing is used

So what is your initial analysis of this warning?
(You can find mine above, the line starts with "I hope".)

Carl Eugen
_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-user mailing list
[hidden email]
http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-user

To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email
[hidden email] with subject "unsubscribe".
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: 'ff_h264_handle_aggregated_packet' does not match original declaration

Reindl Harald


Am 12.02.2017 um 14:52 schrieb Carl Eugen Hoyos:

> 2017-02-12 5:36 GMT+01:00 Reindl Harald <[hidden email]>:
>>
>> Am 12.02.2017 um 03:30 schrieb Carl Eugen Hoyos:
>>>
>>> 2017-02-12 3:23 GMT+01:00 Reindl Harald <[hidden email]>:
>>>
>>>> gcc-6.3.1-1.fc24.x86_64
>>>
>>> gcc.gnu.org doesn't know this release;-)
>>>
>>> Anyway: Please understand that several hundred real, user-reported,
>>> reproducible bugs exist in current FFmpeg, some of them regressions.
>>> I hope you agree that compiler bugs are not our priority...
>>> (It's bad enough that we have to invest time in "undefined behaviour"
>>> where no compiler ever failed.)
>>
>> no i do *not* agree beause some some of that warnings may the
>> reason for unfixed bugs
>
> I wonder what "may" means here...

google for the word

you don't know the underlying reason of reported but unfixed bugs andf
much more not the reason for existing and currently not reported bugs
and when of the reasons could be some code smell

>> things like "src/libavcodec/mpegvideo.c:960:17: warning: this
>> 'if' clause does not guard... [-Wmisleading-indentation]" are a clear
>> indication that this code should be reviewed
>
> Please do;-)

maybe you still don't realize that i am not a C/C++ developer and have
no plans to change that but if i woul dbe one no single line of code
would be commited by me where a recent compiler works and before i
consider implement new features i would cleanup my stuff like the last
decade any PHP code from me was running with "error_reporting E_ALL |
E_STRICT" in production

>> and to be frankly where i develop software (though not in C/C++ but that
>> don't matter) i first keep my house clean and fix any warnings software can
>
> Sounds as if we found a new contributor - welcome!

what exactly did you not undestandin "though not in C/C++"

>> detected automatically and *then* consider to waste my time trying to
>> reprodce things which could have been gone by get rid of all the code smell
>
> It's funny that you wrote this mail a few hours after I fixed most
> of the current warnings - or "several" if you prefer

it's funny that your first reply sounded like "don't care because could
not reprocude it within 10 seconds"

> (Yes, we do exactly what you ask for, I just request that you realize
> fixing these warnings practically never fixes a real issue, while we
> know about many - ! - real issues including remote DOS, regressions
> on valid input files and sometimes subtle change of behaviour, both
> intended and unintended.)
>
>>> That's apart from the fact that --extra-cflags and --extra-ldflags
>>> generally make bug reports invalid (as you correctly indicated)
>>> except for paths and libraries
>>
>> you still refused to answer my question if you did a LTO build as you
>
> (You refused to answer my question.)

where was the question in your inital repsonse?

>> pretended you can't reporduce it, as you always request full input
>> of ffmpeg command lines why don't you do the same?
>
> I was hoping my original comment made it crystal-clear that I did
> try to reproduce the issues you saw.

no, it soundd just like "i spent 10 seconds, the things did not jup
straigth into my face and since we have so many other work i don't waste
any time for cleanups"

>> src/libavformat/rtpdec_formats.h:41:5: warning: type of
>> 'ff_h264_handle_aggregated_packet' does not match original declaration
>> [-Wlto-type-mismatch]
>>  int ff_h264_handle_aggregated_packet(AVFormatContext *ctx, PayloadContext
>> *data, AVPacket *pkt,
>>      ^
>> src/libavformat/rtpdec_h264.c:206:5: note:
>> 'ff_h264_handle_aggregated_packet' was previously declared here
>>  int ff_h264_handle_aggregated_packet(AVFormatContext *ctx, PayloadContext
>> *data, AVPacket *pkt,
>>      ^
>> src/libavformat/rtpdec_h264.c:206:5: note: code may be misoptimized unless
>> -fno-strict-aliasing is used
>
> So what is your initial analysis of this warning?
> (You can find mine above, the line starts with "I hope".)

that there is a sloppy type/pointer handling
_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-user mailing list
[hidden email]
http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-user

To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email
[hidden email] with subject "unsubscribe".
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: 'ff_h264_handle_aggregated_packet' does not match original declaration

Carl Eugen Hoyos-2
2017-02-12 16:01 GMT+01:00 Reindl Harald <[hidden email]>:
>
> Am 12.02.2017 um 14:52 schrieb Carl Eugen Hoyos:
>>
>> 2017-02-12 5:36 GMT+01:00 Reindl Harald <[hidden email]>:

>>> src/libavformat/rtpdec_formats.h:41:5: warning: type of
>>> 'ff_h264_handle_aggregated_packet' does not match original declaration
>>> [-Wlto-type-mismatch]
>>>  int ff_h264_handle_aggregated_packet(AVFormatContext *ctx,
>>> PayloadContext
>>> *data, AVPacket *pkt,
>>>      ^
>>> src/libavformat/rtpdec_h264.c:206:5: note:
>>> 'ff_h264_handle_aggregated_packet' was previously declared here
>>>  int ff_h264_handle_aggregated_packet(AVFormatContext *ctx,
>>> PayloadContext
>>> *data, AVPacket *pkt,
>>>      ^
>>> src/libavformat/rtpdec_h264.c:206:5: note: code may be misoptimized
>>> unless
>>> -fno-strict-aliasing is used
>>
>>
>> So what is your initial analysis of this warning?
>> (You can find mine above, the line starts with "I hope".)
>
> that there is a sloppy type/pointer handling

I disagree and I have to add that I do not appreciate your mail.

Carl Eugen
_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-user mailing list
[hidden email]
http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-user

To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email
[hidden email] with subject "unsubscribe".
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: 'ff_h264_handle_aggregated_packet' does not match original declaration

Reindl Harald


Am 12.02.2017 um 16:03 schrieb Carl Eugen Hoyos:

> 2017-02-12 16:01 GMT+01:00 Reindl Harald <[hidden email]>:
>>
>> Am 12.02.2017 um 14:52 schrieb Carl Eugen Hoyos:
>>>
>>> 2017-02-12 5:36 GMT+01:00 Reindl Harald <[hidden email]>:
>
>>>> src/libavformat/rtpdec_formats.h:41:5: warning: type of
>>>> 'ff_h264_handle_aggregated_packet' does not match original declaration
>>>> [-Wlto-type-mismatch]
>>>>  int ff_h264_handle_aggregated_packet(AVFormatContext *ctx,
>>>> PayloadContext
>>>> *data, AVPacket *pkt,
>>>>      ^
>>>> src/libavformat/rtpdec_h264.c:206:5: note:
>>>> 'ff_h264_handle_aggregated_packet' was previously declared here
>>>>  int ff_h264_handle_aggregated_packet(AVFormatContext *ctx,
>>>> PayloadContext
>>>> *data, AVPacket *pkt,
>>>>      ^
>>>> src/libavformat/rtpdec_h264.c:206:5: note: code may be misoptimized
>>>> unless
>>>> -fno-strict-aliasing is used
>>>
>>>
>>> So what is your initial analysis of this warning?
>>> (You can find mine above, the line starts with "I hope".)
>>
>> that there is a sloppy type/pointer handling
>
> I disagree and I have to add that I do not appreciate your mail

should i draw you a picture or which words does it need making you
understand that i am not a C/C++ developer and so asking me detail
questions about your code smell makes little to zero sense

well, and i did not appreciate the whole lot for your responses instead
just look at the damned outputs when you compiule ffmpeg where ovewr
many years a large amount of warnings appears

to say it clear: i have ZERO understanding fro a developer which
compiles hes code, faces warnings and decides to just ignore them - PERIOD
_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-user mailing list
[hidden email]
http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-user

To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email
[hidden email] with subject "unsubscribe".
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: 'ff_h264_handle_aggregated_packet' does not match original declaration

Carl Eugen Hoyos-2
2017-02-12 16:08 GMT+01:00 Reindl Harald <[hidden email]>:

> should i draw you a picture or which words does it need
> making you understand that i am not a C/C++ developer

Then how can you dare to write the remaining email indicating
you understand gcc's warning messages better than I do?

I have now spent several hours on (several!) gcc bugs
that you reported to this mailing list, including the offensive
claim that I do not spend enough time writing emails here
and working on FFmpeg in general.

Please stop this, Carl Eugen
_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-user mailing list
[hidden email]
http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-user

To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email
[hidden email] with subject "unsubscribe".
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: 'ff_h264_handle_aggregated_packet' does not match original declaration

Reindl Harald


Am 12.02.2017 um 16:16 schrieb Carl Eugen Hoyos:
> 2017-02-12 16:08 GMT+01:00 Reindl Harald <[hidden email]>:
>
>> should i draw you a picture or which words does it need
>> making you understand that i am not a C/C++ developer
>
> Then how can you dare to write the remaining email indicating
> you understand gcc's warning messages better than I do?

i did not - i just noted "i guess that should be fixed somehow as well
as -Wmisleading-indentation is a clearly warning sign - at the bottom
also a lot of dead code which maybe only get visible when building with
LTO"

but i dare to state "-Wmisleading-indentation" is pretty clear for
everybody even if he did not write a single line of code in any language
ever

> I have now spent several hours on (several!) gcc bugs
> that you reported to this mailing list, including the offensive
> claim that I do not spend enough time writing emails here
> and working on FFmpeg in general.
>
> Please stop this, Carl Eugen

where did i claim that?

if you would get rid of your attitude "That's apart from the fact that
--extra-cflags and --extra-ldflags generally make bug reports invalid
(as you correctly indicated) except for paths and libraries" instead
saying "thank you, we'll take a look if we can make code improvmenets
based on compiler flags we don't use everyday" things would be much more
relaxed

the same for your damned "only current GIT is supported here" to each
and every people asking a simple question where you claim you are the
one and only revelant guy on this list while it is called "users" which
implies the opposite
_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-user mailing list
[hidden email]
http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-user

To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email
[hidden email] with subject "unsubscribe".
Loading...