cambi.c: validate input value ranges #1355
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
Benchmarks on 10-bit input on a Macbook M1 show no significant difference. Both cases running just CAMBI, single-threaded. |
|
LGTM for now. Might need to revisit if we need to go after CAMBI speedups. |
kylophone
approved these changes
Mar 29, 2024
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Replaces #1352. Benchmarks on my laptop show no observable overhead wrt master but need to check further.
(my benchmarks were on a 10-bit input so it's not just because of the early return in 8-bit and 16-bit cases)