W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-media@w3.org > March 2014

Re: [EME] Uint8Array parameters may be modified while scheduled task is pending

From: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2014 18:03:01 +1100
Message-ID: <CAHp8n2nZC6Q3LyD06V4MrW9YE=cxv59iq4JLCtP+W6KhMjUHpQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Robert O'Callahan" <robert@ocallahan.org>
Cc: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@hsivonen.fi>, David Dorwin <ddorwin@google.com>, "public-html-media@w3.org" <public-html-media@w3.org>
Hi Rob,

Do you also have an opinion on the DataCue issue
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24687 ?
Feel free to leave it in the bug.


On Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 8:55 AM, Robert O'Callahan <robert@ocallahan.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 4, 2014 at 12:35 AM, Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@hsivonen.fi> wrote:
>> I object to both MSE and EME introducing a race condition like that.
>> IIRC, this issue already came up with Web Audio. CCing roc for the
>> details.
> I think the situation here is different from Web Audio. In Web Audio we had
> true races between threads. In this EME case, there is a well-defined time
> at which the array contents are used --- when the task scheduled by
> "Schedule a task to initialize the session, providing contentType, initData,
> and the new object." runs in the HTML5 event loop. Therefore, as far as I
> can tell, you don't necessarily need to specify anything here. In David's
> original example, the value 9 would always be used.
>> I think the method should act as if it made a copy of the data before
>> returning. In practice, it probably makes sense to have some sort of
>> copy-on-write mechanism behind the scenes to avoid copying when no one
>> is actually writing to the original buffer.
> In Web Audio we avoided requiring implementations to support copy-on-write
> optimization of typed array buffers. We did this by specifying that typed
> arrays passed to certain APIs are neutered --- effectively, ownership of the
> buffer is transferred to the callee and it's impossible for Web content to
> modify that array afterward. Applying that approach to David's example, the
> assignment of 9 would fail because the array would have length 0 after being
> passed to createSession.
> As far as I know, nothing in the Web platform currently depends on COW
> optimization of typed array buffers for efficiency. I'd like to preserve
> that if possible.
> Rob
> --
> Jtehsauts  tshaei dS,o n" Wohfy  Mdaon  yhoaus  eanuttehrotraiitny  eovni le
> atrhtohu gthot sf oirng iyvoeu rs ihnesa.r"t sS?o  Whhei csha iids  teoa
> stiheer :p atroa lsyazye,d  'mYaonu,r  "sGients  uapr,e  tfaokreg iyvoeunr,
> 'm aotr  atnod  sgaoy ,h o'mGee.t"  uTph eann dt hwea lmka'n?  gBoutt  uIp
> waanndt  wyeonut  thoo mken.o w
Received on Thursday, 6 March 2014 07:03:51 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:33:02 UTC