[opus] Availability of the 1.1.1 stable version
Suresh Thiriveedi
sthiriveedi at gmail.com
Wed Apr 22 04:37:02 PDT 2015
Hi
Looks like 1.1 version is sensitive to the system
architecture/compiler/kernel version. Below is my observation in various
linux system I have.
As you mentioned, you are not observed the crash in your system, can you
please share your system details. And also please comment on the below
table/observations.
*Machine IP*
*optimization flags*
*RHEL version*
*kernel version*
*gcc version*
*architecture*
*Result/observation*
172.27.2.63
CFLAGS = -g -O0
6.4
2.6.32-358.18.1.el6.x86_64
4.4.7
Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2648L 0 @ 1.80GHz
Crash
172.27.9.56
CFLAGS = -g -O0
7
3.10.0-123.13.1.el7.x86_64
4.8.2
Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2650 0 @ 2.00GHz
No Crash
172.27.5.231
CFLAGS = -g -O0
5.3
2.6.18-128.el5
4.1.2
Intel(R) Core(TM) i3 CPU 540 @ 3.07GHz
No Crash
With any other optimization flags (1,2,3), it is crashing in all the above
servers.
Thanks
Suresh
On 21 April 2015 at 14:17, Suresh Thiriveedi <sthiriveedi at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Red Hat Enterprise Linux Server release 6.4 (Santiago)
> gcc version 4.4.7 20120313 (Red Hat 4.4.7-3) (GCC)
>
> We see the issue in all our Intel based Linux servers.
>
> Thanks
> Suresh
>
>
>
> On 21 April 2015 at 12:41, Jean-Marc Valin <jmvalin at jmvalin.ca> wrote:
>
>> 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
>> > > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.xiph.org/pipermail/opus/attachments/20150422/0f20ff2a/attachment-0001.htm
More information about the opus
mailing list