From: Andrei Emeltchenko <andrei.emeltchenko.news@gmail.com>
To: Andrzej Kaczmarek <andrzej.kaczmarek@tieto.com>
Cc: Marcel Holtmann <marcel@holtmann.org>,
linux-bluetooth <linux-bluetooth@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] android/hal-audio: Fix wrong memory access
Date: Tue, 27 May 2014 10:54:22 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140527075343.GA9423@aemeltch-MOBL1> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAF3PWx0XGcT+s+2i6wxsZevLpa7oP9uNQ84AsEt0xNYNaf+2xA@mail.gmail.com>
On Mon, May 26, 2014 at 02:59:31PM +0200, Andrzej Kaczmarek wrote:
> Hi Marcel,
>
> On 26 May 2014 14:48, Marcel Holtmann <marcel@holtmann.org> wrote:
> > Hi Andrzej,
> >
> >>>> downmix_buf is allocated to have buffer size FIXED_BUFFER_SIZE / 2, when
> >>>> we access it as (int16_t *) we shall device index by 2.
> >>>> ---
> >>>> android/hal-audio.c | 2 +-
> >>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >>>>
> >>>> diff --git a/android/hal-audio.c b/android/hal-audio.c
> >>>> index 7305bb6..96fa5c3 100644
> >>>> --- a/android/hal-audio.c
> >>>> +++ b/android/hal-audio.c
> >>>> @@ -984,7 +984,7 @@ static void downmix_to_mono(struct a2dp_stream_out *out, const uint8_t *buffer,
> >>>> int16_t *output = (void *) out->downmix_buf;
> >>>> size_t i;
> >>>>
> >>>> - for (i = 0; i < bytes / 2; i++) {
> >>>> + for (i = 0; i < bytes / (2 * sizeof(int16_t)); i++) {
> >>>> int16_t l = le16_to_cpu(get_unaligned(&input[i * 2]));
> >>>> int16_t r = le16_to_cpu(get_unaligned(&input[i * 2 + 1]));
> >>>
> >>> I wonder actually what this get_unaligned is doing here? You cast the const void into const int16_t buffer. Is this really needed? Where is our input and output buffer coming from? Aren’t these aligned anyway? Meaning aren’t they allocated?
> >>
> >> We have this buffer from AudioFlinger so we don't actually know
> >> alignment or if this is pointer to beginning of some internal buffer
> >> (it's most probably both, but I don't think we should assume this).
> >
> > and audio system that does not give you a guarantee here on the alignment is utterly screwed up. Seriously, that is just bad for performance. Especially bad on ARM CPUs, so I doubt that they have not thought about this.
>
> This is only to be on safe side and in terms of performance it does
> not really matter here since this code won't probably be used at all -
It was definitely not used. It crashes. I have modified code for SCO where
downmix was used.
Best regards
Andrei Emeltchenko
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-05-27 7:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-05-22 13:07 [RFC] android/hal-audio: Fix wrong memory access Andrei Emeltchenko
2014-05-22 13:54 ` Andrzej Kaczmarek
2014-05-22 14:16 ` Andrei Emeltchenko
2014-05-22 14:21 ` Marcel Holtmann
2014-05-26 12:36 ` Andrzej Kaczmarek
2014-05-26 12:48 ` Marcel Holtmann
2014-05-26 12:59 ` Andrzej Kaczmarek
2014-05-26 13:14 ` Marcel Holtmann
2014-05-27 7:54 ` Andrei Emeltchenko [this message]
2014-05-26 12:39 ` Szymon Janc
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20140527075343.GA9423@aemeltch-MOBL1 \
--to=andrei.emeltchenko.news@gmail.com \
--cc=andrzej.kaczmarek@tieto.com \
--cc=linux-bluetooth@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=marcel@holtmann.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox