Simon Hug
There's a chance that an audio conversion from many channels to a few can use more than 9 audio filters. SDL_AudioCVT has 10 SDL_AudioFilter pointers of which one has to be the terminating NULL pointer. The SDL code has no checks for this limit. If it overflows there can be stack or heap corruption or a call to 0xa.
Attached patch adds a function that checks for this limit and throws an error if it is reached. Also adds some documentation.
Test parameters that trigger this issue:
AUDIO_U16MSB with 224 channels at 46359 Hz
V
AUDIO_S16MSB with 6 channels at 27463 Hz
The fuzzer program I uploaded in bug 3667 has more of them.
These don't have to be power-of-2 sizes anymore because of SDL_AudioStream,
and the new resampler, but also, many platforms don't give you power-of-2 DMA
buffer in the first place!
The API specifies that SDL_OpenAudio() will fill out the 'desired' audio spec
with the correct samples and size set by the driver. This value is important
since it may be used by applications that size audio buffers, etc.
However, we want to allow advanced applications to call SDL_OpenAudioDevice()
which gets passed a const 'desired' parameter, and have the correct data filled
into the 'obtained' parameter, possibly allowing or not allowing format changes.
So... 'obtained' becomes the audio format the user callback is expected to use,
and we add flags to allow the application to specify which format changes are
allowed.
Note: We really need to add a way to query the 'obtained' audio spec.
From: "Markus F.X.J. Oberhumer"
Subject: [SDL-CVS][patch] add missing SDLCALL to headers
the small patch attached below (against current CVS) adds some missing SDLCALL
decorations to callback types and arguments.
Unfortunately one of these changes breaks your gen{def,exp}.pl scripts which
should be changed to use non-greedy regular expression matching...
From: David Symmonds
Subject: SDL Typedef Structs
Hi, Thanks for the SDL libraries, I have been using them for about a year
now and they are really brilliant. One thing that I have just found whilst
using them through C++ (and needing forward declarations) is that when you
typedef structs you sometimes use
typedef struct Name
{
...
}Name;
e.g. SDL_Surface
and other times use
typedef struct
{
...
}Name;
e.g. SDL_Rect
The first type works fine, when I define a header file I can just put
'struct Name;' at the top and use the Name throughout. However, the second
type is harder to use in a header, and I haven't found a way yet, other than
to include 'SDL.h' in the header file (undesirable). Would there be any harm
in changing the definition of SDL_Rect and such like to the second form?
