[opus] Availability of the 1.1.1 stable version
Jean-Marc Valin
jmvalin at jmvalin.ca
Tue Apr 21 00:11:32 PDT 2015
Still can't reproduce. What OS and compiler version?
Jean-Marc
On 21/04/15 02:48 AM, Suresh Thiriveedi wrote:
> Hi,
>
> There is no change in the compiler flags. I'm using as it is from the
> original code. No change in the Makefile and I believe it is using the
> floating point only by default.
>
> We are using 8k samples and mono so the commands is as follows.
>
> [root at MEDIA opus-1.1]# ./opus_demo -d 8000 1 opus_encoded_crash.opus
> opus_encoded_crash.pcm
>
> *_And segmentation is as below.._*.
> ............
> Calling opus_decode123. len[toggle]:79, output_samples:96000
> data[0] = 78
> data[0] = 78
> 78 87 46 18 4f fe a6 be 7d 8 6 33 e2 79 ee e4 71 55 a7 3a 8 c9 48 d6
> a7 20 3b 7 95 18 b8 4b 8f 24 fa a6 50 87 97 9c d7 13 d0 b2 c3 c4 6d 2f
> 8b 6c 13 6f bb 16 cc 20 85 4e c7 5d 2e 90 41 ae 47 8b 3e 36 eb c7 c8 28
> 94 3 c3 f9 52 aa 84 output_samples ==<160>
> Calling opus_decode123. len[toggle]:89, output_samples:96000
> data[0] = 78
> data[0] = 78
> 78 87 29 db 92 15 9c 94 bf b8 cd 23 22 ab bf bf 48 26 52 21 26 b5 b2 d5
> 4d 7c 6f 8f ec 65 d2 2c 2 30 7f 81 dc 4 9c 10 82 5f e7 ff 62 4e ec d4
> ac 16 9a 4d a9 49 67 86 e7 c a8 6c a5 4f 45 2f 95 b0 71 32 fb b6 fb 72
> fd 25 f5 40 65 df 4e 5d 8c 2d 84 8e 17 c6 67 12 5f output_samples ==<160>
> Calling opus_decode123. len[toggle]:3, output_samples:96000
> *data[0] = f8*
> *data[0] = f8*
> *Segmentation fault*
> [root at MEDIA opus-1.1]#
>
> Whereas if I run the same in 1.1.1, this is the output and i'm able to
> play the pcm file
>
> [root at MEDIA opus-1.1]#./opus_demo -d 8000 1 opus_encoded_crash.opus
> opus_encoded_crash.pcm
> libopus 1.1.1-beta
> Decoding with 8000 Hz output (1 channels)
> average bitrate: 31.864 kb/s
> maximum bitrate: 49.200 kb/s
> bitrate standard deviation: 3.412 kb/s
> [root at MEDIA opus-1.1]#
>
> *_compiler flags in 1.1:_*
>
> AWK = gawk
> CC = gcc -std=gnu99
> CCAS = gcc -std=gnu99
> CCASDEPMODE = depmode=gcc3
> CCASFLAGS = -g -O2
> CCDEPMODE = depmode=gcc3
> CFLAGS = -g -O2 -fvisibility=hidden -W -Wall -Wextra -Wcast-align
> -Wnested-externs -Wshadow -Wstrict-prototypes
> CPP = gcc -E
> CPPFLAGS =
> CYGPATH_W = echo
> DEFS = -DHAVE_CONFIG_H
> DEPDIR = .deps
> DLLTOOL = false
>
>
> But If i run the same command you did (./opus_demo -d 48000 2
> opus_encoded_crash.opus out.pcm) also crashed (same). Do I need to
> change any Makefile setting based on my system configuration? What is
> your system config?
>
> *This is my system config:*
> model name :*Intel(R) *Core(TM) i3 CPU 540 @ 3.07GHz
>
>
> Thanks
> Suresh
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 21 April 2015 at 07:45, Jean-Marc Valin <jmvalin at jmvalin.ca
> <mailto:jmvalin at jmvalin.ca>> wrote:
>
> I just tried decoding with v1.1:
> ./opus_demo -d 48000 2 opus_encoded_crash.opus out.pcm
>
> and I see no issue (including with valgrind). Does the same command-line
> create problems for you? What compile flags did you use? fixed-point or
> float, any assembly, ...? Could be assembly here, or even a compiler bug
> wouldn't be unheard of.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Jean-Marc
>
>
> On 20/04/15 07:27 AM, Suresh Thiriveedi wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > We are able to reproduce the issue with the 1.1 opus_demo (sample file).
> > We captured the frames in our server just before the opus_decode and fed
> > the file to opus_demo (1.1) and it is crashing. Same file is tested with
> > 1.1.1 and it is fine. So this is in line with our server testing
> > observation and I think here we can conclude that the 1.1 library is
> > crashing while handling a specific mode frame as explained in my earlier
> > mail.
> >
> > Here I'm attaching the captured opus encoded file which is causing the
> > crash.
> >
> > Thanks
> > Suresh
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On 17 April 2015 at 02:27, Jean-Marc Valin <jmvalin at jmvalin.ca <mailto:jmvalin at jmvalin.ca>
> > <mailto:jmvalin at jmvalin.ca <mailto:jmvalin at jmvalin.ca>>> wrote:
> >
> > To be decodable by opus_demo, you'll have to add the 8-byte "header".
> > Just put in the length of the packet followed by "0" for the encoder
> > range (0 means "not present").
> >
> > That being said, from previous experience, the most likely cause of the
> > crash is a bug in your software causing a corruption in Opus. So it's
> > safe to assume that if you can't reproduce the bug using opus_demo, then
> > that's indeed the case.
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Jean-Marc
> >
> > On 16/04/15 08:32 AM, Suresh Thiriveedi wrote:
> > > This is observed on a live call between webRTC browser client and
> > > another legacy client. Our server is there in between and transcoding
> > > from opus to another codec and this is observed while decoding the opus.
> > >
> > > Anyway, I'll try to capture/dump the packets in the server before
> > > feeding to the opus_decode and share with you. But this will not have
> > > the first 8 bytes (length+enc range) to directly feed to the sample
> > > binary. Please let me know if this is fine.
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > > Suresh
> > >
> > > On 16 April 2015 at 17:36, Jean-Marc Valin <jmvalin at jmvalin.ca <mailto:jmvalin at jmvalin.ca>
> <mailto:jmvalin at jmvalin.ca <mailto:jmvalin at jmvalin.ca>>
> > > <mailto:jmvalin at jmvalin.ca <mailto:jmvalin at jmvalin.ca>
> <mailto:jmvalin at jmvalin.ca <mailto:jmvalin at jmvalin.ca>>>> wrote:
> > >
> > > Please provide the input file that produces this with
> opus_demo.
> > >
> > > On 16/04/15 03:24 AM, Suresh Thiriveedi wrote:
> > > > Hi Jean-Marc,
> > > >
> > > > Could you please update if you got a chance to look
> into. As I
> > > > mentioned, I don't see the same issue in 1.1.1, but I
> don't see any
> > > > difference in 1.1.1 other than optimization based on
> the architecture.
> > > > This optimization could have fixed some stack overflow
> issue in some
> > > > specific cases?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Thanks
> > > > Suresh
> > > >
> > > > On 13 April 2015 at 12:39, Suresh Thiriveedi
> <sthiriveedi at gmail.com <mailto:sthiriveedi at gmail.com>
> <mailto:sthiriveedi at gmail.com <mailto:sthiriveedi at gmail.com>>
> > <mailto:sthiriveedi at gmail.com <mailto:sthiriveedi at gmail.com>
> <mailto:sthiriveedi at gmail.com <mailto:sthiriveedi at gmail.com>>>
> > > > <mailto:sthiriveedi at gmail.com
> <mailto:sthiriveedi at gmail.com> <mailto:sthiriveedi at gmail.com
> <mailto:sthiriveedi at gmail.com>>
> > <mailto:sthiriveedi at gmail.com <mailto:sthiriveedi at gmail.com>
> <mailto:sthiriveedi at gmail.com <mailto:sthiriveedi at gmail.com>>>>> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi Jean-Marc,
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for your response. Please find the details
> as below.
> > > >
> > > > *_Backtrace we got for this crash:_*
> > > >
> > > > #0 0x0000000000800c54 in opus_decode_frame
> > (st=0x38906b8f99d09c5,
> > > >
> > > > data=0xf0aa10b4ef1008ae <Address
> 0xf0aa10b4ef1008ae
> > out of
> > > > bounds>, len=-188613428, pcm=0x6e80016085efd57,
> > > >
> > > > frame_size=44037315, decode_fec=58716895) at
> > > src/opus_decoder.c:384
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > #1 0x00000000008009c0 in opus_decode_frame
> (st=0x712357d0,
> > > >
> > > > data=0x7effff9ab72d
> > > >
> > >
> >
> "~▒`\\▒K\005▒▒y▒w+g~▒S2\025▒\036T▒\002x▒▒h!▒▒▒\220\233\066s▒\030#gb
> > > > \rn▒rF\005Q▒\213;▒`\207$O▒(m\222=9▒▒/h▒▒t▒▒E묳w▒\237\"
> > \206z\005
> > > > \213»u at e", len=88, pcm=0x7effff9a6a80, frame_size=640,
> > > decode_fec=0)
> > > > at src/opus_decoder.c:319
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > #2 0x0000000000801be1 in opus_decode_native
> (st=0x712357d0,
> > > >
> > > > data=0x7effff9ab72d
> > > >
> > >
> >
> "~▒`\\▒K\005▒▒y▒w+g~▒S2\025▒\036T▒\002x▒▒h!▒▒▒\220\233\066s▒\030#gb
> > > > \rn▒rF\005Q▒\213;▒`\207$O▒(m\222=9▒▒/h▒▒t▒▒E묳w▒\237\"
> > \206z\005
> > > > \213»u at e", len=89, pcm=0x7effff9a6a80, frame_size=640,
> > > decode_fec=0,
> > > > self_delimited=0,
> > > >
> > > > packet_offset=0x0, soft_clip=1) at
> > src/opus_decoder.c:681
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > #3 0x000000000080226c in opus_decode (st=0x712357d0,
> > > >
> > > > data=0x7effff9ab72c
> > > >
> > >
> >
> "▒~▒`\\▒K\005▒▒y▒w+g~▒S2\025▒\036T▒\002x▒▒h!▒▒▒\220\233\066s▒\030#gb
> > > > \rn▒rF\005Q▒\213;▒`\207$O▒(m\222=9▒▒/h▒▒t▒▒E묳w▒\237\"
> > \206z\005
> > > > \213»u at e", len=89, pcm=0x71245a60, frame_size=640,
> > > decode_fec=0) at
> > > > src/opus_decoder.c:867
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > #4 0x00000000004fd6b5 in kn_opus_decode
> > (decHandle=0x712357d0,
> > > > decProp=0x1675698, src=0x16756d0, dest=0x71245a60,
> > > >
> > > > dstLen=0x1673210) at MSTranscodeOPUS.c:100
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > *_And the code flow what we have observed for this
> specific
> > > incident:_*
> > > > *_
> > > > _*
> > > > *_Called this as mode is CELT_ONLY,_*
> > > >
> > > > if (data!=NULL && st->prev_mode > 0 && (
> > > > (mode == MODE_CELT_ONLY && st->prev_mode !=
> > MODE_CELT_ONLY &&
> > > > !st->prev_redundancy)
> > > > || (mode != MODE_CELT_ONLY && st->prev_mode ==
> > MODE_CELT_ONLY) )
> > > > )
> > > > {
> > > > _transition = 1_;
> > > > /* Decide where to allocate the stack memory for
> > pcm_transition */
> > > > if (mode == MODE_CELT_ONLY)
> > > > pcm_transition_celt_size = F5*st->channels;
> > > > else
> > > > pcm_transition_silk_size = F5*st->channels;
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > *_So transition is made as 1 called this,_*
> > > >
> > > > if (transition && mode == MODE_CELT_ONLY)
> > > > {
> > > > pcm_transition = pcm_transition_celt;
> > > > opus_decode_frame(st, NULL, 0, pcm_transition,
> > IMIN(F5,
> > > > audiosize), 0);
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > *_In "opus_decode_frame" again, as data is passed as
> > NULL, goes to
> > > > else part_*
> > > >
> > > > if (data != NULL)
> > > > {
> > > > audiosize = st->frame_size;
> > > > mode = st->mode;
> > > > ec_dec_init(&dec,(unsigned char*)data,len);
> > > > } else {
> > > > audiosize = frame_size;
> > > > mode = st->prev_mode;
> > > >
> > > > *_As the mode is made as prev mode now, which was a
> > silk, this
> > > goes
> > > > inside,_*
> > > >
> > > > /* SILK processing */
> > > > if (mode != MODE_CELT_ONLY)
> > > > {
> > > >
> > > > *_Then in this function called this_*,
> > > >
> > > > silk_ret = silk_Decode( silk_dec,
> &st->DecControl,
> > > > lost_flag,
> first_frame,
> > &dec,
> > > > pcm_ptr, &silk_frame_size );
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > *_And finally, somehow, the "silk_frame_size" is a
> negative
> > > value (
> > > > say -1376272 in our case), then in the same function
> > called the
> > > > below and this crashes here._*
> > > >
> > > > pcm_ptr += silk_frame_size * st->channels;
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Please help.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks
> > > > Suresh
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On 12 April 2015 at 21:23, Jean-Marc Valin
> > <jmvalin at jmvalin.ca <mailto:jmvalin at jmvalin.ca>
> <mailto:jmvalin at jmvalin.ca <mailto:jmvalin at jmvalin.ca>>
> > <mailto:jmvalin at jmvalin.ca <mailto:jmvalin at jmvalin.ca>
> <mailto:jmvalin at jmvalin.ca <mailto:jmvalin at jmvalin.ca>>>
> > > > <mailto:jmvalin at jmvalin.ca
> <mailto:jmvalin at jmvalin.ca> <mailto:jmvalin at jmvalin.ca
> <mailto:jmvalin at jmvalin.ca>>
> > <mailto:jmvalin at jmvalin.ca <mailto:jmvalin at jmvalin.ca>
> <mailto:jmvalin at jmvalin.ca <mailto:jmvalin at jmvalin.ca>>>>> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Do you have any file that demonstrates the
> problem with either
> > > > opus_demo
> > > > or opusdec?
> > > >
> > > > Jean-Marc
> > > >
> > > > On 09/04/15 04:01 AM, Suresh Thiriveedi wrote:
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm curious to know when would be the 1.1.1
> stable version
> > > > available.
> > > > >
> > > > > In 1.1, we are facing crash when opus
> library is trying to
> > > > decode the
> > > > > CELT-only, full band and 20 ms. So we tried
> with 1.1.1 beta
> > > > and it looks
> > > > > to be fine. Is there any open issue
> regarding this in 1.1 version?
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks
> > > > > Suresh
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > opus mailing list
> > > > > opus at xiph.org <mailto:opus at xiph.org>
> <mailto:opus at xiph.org <mailto:opus at xiph.org>> <mailto:opus at xiph.org
> <mailto:opus at xiph.org>
> > <mailto:opus at xiph.org <mailto:opus at xiph.org>>>
> > > <mailto:opus at xiph.org <mailto:opus at xiph.org>
> <mailto:opus at xiph.org <mailto:opus at xiph.org>>
> > <mailto:opus at xiph.org <mailto:opus at xiph.org>
> <mailto:opus at xiph.org <mailto:opus at xiph.org>>>>
> > > > > http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/opus
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
More information about the opus
mailing list