[pulseaudio-discuss] [PATCH 12/13] loopback: Validate the rate parameter

[Georg Chini]

On 18.12.2015 06:49, Tanu Kaskinen wrote:
> On Wed, 2015-02-25 at 19:43 +0100, Georg Chini wrote:
>> ---
>>   src/modules/module-loopback.c | 5 +++++
>>   src/pulse/sample.c            | 5 ++++-
>>   2 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/src/modules/module-loopback.c b/src/modules/module-loopback.c
>> index d22afb5..7474ef2 100644
>> --- a/src/modules/module-loopback.c
>> +++ b/src/modules/module-loopback.c
>> @@ -1039,6 +1039,11 @@ int pa__init(pa_module *m) {
>>           goto fail;
>>       }
>>   
>> +    if (ss.rate < 4000 || ss.rate > PA_RATE_MAX) {
>> +        pa_log("Invalid rate specification, valid range is 4000 Hz to %i Hz", PA_RATE_MAX);
>> +        goto fail;
>> +    }
>> +
> I pushed this change...
>
>>       if (pa_modargs_get_value(ma, "format", NULL))
>>           format_set = true;
>>   
>> diff --git a/src/pulse/sample.c b/src/pulse/sample.c
>> index 1331c72..69ac83f 100644
>> --- a/src/pulse/sample.c
>> +++ b/src/pulse/sample.c
>> @@ -106,7 +106,10 @@ int pa_sample_format_valid(unsigned format) {
>>   }
>>   
>>   int pa_sample_rate_valid(uint32_t rate) {
>> -    return rate > 0 && rate <= PA_RATE_MAX;
>> +    /* The extra 1% is due to module-loopback: it temporarily sets
>> +     * a higher-than-nominal rate to get rid of excessive buffer
>> +     * latency */
>> +    return rate > 0 && rate <= PA_RATE_MAX * 101 / 100;
> ...but I left this one out. The two changes fix two separate issues, so
> they should be in separate patches.
>
> Making pa_sample_rate_valid() accept values above PA_RATE_MAX isn't
> very nice, but I can see how it's better than the current behaviour,
> which probably can cause the daemon to crash. Alexander mentioned in
> IRC that he'd prefer doing the adaptive resampling inside module-
> loopback rather than using pa_sink_input_set_rate(), and this change
> demonstrates one good reason for that. I'm not asking you to implement
> that change, but it certainly would be nice.
>
> -- 
> Tanu
Thank you for reviewing my patch set. Now that you are done with it
(patch 13 will become obsolete) I will collect all your input and send a
new set. It will probably take a while, there are lots of changes that I
have to make to my current code.