[sane-devel] constrain value related query

[viresh]

On Wednesday 17 July 2013 07:17 AM, m. allan noah wrote:
> I can confirm your findings- i think this is a bug in sanei_constrain_value.c.
>
> allan
>
> On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 8:46 PM, Bureau <viresh_shirol at yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> During my backend testing efforts with tstbackend.c frontend that is available in the distribution ,I observed an issue in the sanei_constrain_value function.
>>
>> The details are as below.
>> 1)I believe the specifications for SANE_Range are simple enough and there are no further rules on the values for min,max and quant members.
>>
>> 2)assuming #1 above is correct, my observation is that the constrain_value function returns values that are greater than the max specified for the range.
>>
>> 3)I am assuming that #2 item is either unknown or known but not fixed/valid scenario.
>>
>>
>> 4)the issue
>>
>> the issue happens for constraint type RANGE  when following condition is satisfied
>>
>> (max-min)%quant >=(quant/2)
>>
>> AND
>>
>> value to be set >=max
>>
>>
>> Cause:Due to rounding done using quant/2 value,the final value put in array[i] overshoots the max value by at the max quant/2 units.
>>
>>
>> 5>Why this is an issue for me
>>
>> for few reasons
>> a)I blindly believed the value returned by constrain_value is actually constrained to the max. By this assumption,I did not have to check the values everywhere for their constraint-wise-correctness.
>>
>> b)the machine that I am writing the backend for seems to take tl br values in mm and seems to do some kind of validation using which it decides the actual scan size.So offset of value/s for tl br options would lead to heavy offsets when large resolution scan is done.
>>
>> c)the issue is very dominant,I believe,when the range type is SANE_Fixed. Note that in this case the quant value is sufficiently large leading to larger offsets.
>>
>> 6)Solutions possible
>> a)temporary fix can just check whether the adjusted value is larger than Max for the range and set it to either max or one quant level lesser.
>> Also,I can temporarily fix it in a local function.
>> b)not very sure but If the rounding via quant/2 is removed we can safely say that the value is always safe. I think it's a subjective item and can not discuss further but I think flooring isn't that bad.
>>
>>
>>
>> 7)My test values(sorry to put them at the end)
>> max=SANE_FIX(431.8);//ledger width
>> min=SANE_FIX(0.0);
>> quant=SANE_FIX(0.01);//tried .1,1.0 too
>>
>> value to be set (actually the issue was found when testing with tstbkend.c fronted) is 431.8. (or more ...as constrain value reduces it to max in that case)
>>
>>
>> Query:how do I proceed with this?My main question is "am I doing something wrong??"
>>
>> 8)Additional:
>> this is my first post.I wanna thank you all and especially the ones who have authored the tstbackend frontend.Also,please note that I may ve wrong in using fractional quant values etc but i think there was no limitation w.r.t. in the spec. I apologize in advance if anyone feels any sentence in this post seems to show impoliteness in any way.  ...I am newbie/noob u knw!!!!
>>
>>
>> Thanks and regards,
>> Viresh
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>> --
>> sane-devel mailing list: sane-devel at lists.alioth.debian.org
>> http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sane-devel
>> Unsubscribe: Send mail with subject "unsubscribe your_password"
>>               to sane-devel-request at lists.alioth.debian.org
>
>
Hi Allan,

Thanks for the quick response that day. And I am sorry for the late 
reply from my side.

I am attaching the updated code based on the temporary solutions that I 
had mentioned in my original mail.

I am not sure if this is the correct procedure to send the updated code 
but I am new to git as well.
Also I believe newbies like me can not update the code tree directly anyway.
Could you please review and include the changes in the next release?

Please note that  the changes in my backend code were external to 
sanei_constrain_value.c.
i.e. though the logic was same as the attached file, the patch was 
external to constrain_value function.



Apart from this, I would like to know if I could help the efforts in any 
way. I dont have any hardware to test any backends etc  but I have some 
experience with opencv-v4l configuration which I think can be helpful in 
improving the v4l backend. (At least the man page says it is not so stable)
Also as a plus point w.r.t scanners ,I have some 3+ years of experience 
on multi functional peripherals controller development(for one of the 
brands which do not have a sane backend of their own yet) which included 
work on  UI to middleware.
Let me know if I can be of any help in any way.

Regards,
Viresh M.Shirol
P.S: rather large comment for 1 if block addition in the code but I 
think it explains why the changes were done clearly.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: sanei-sanei_constrain_value.c
Type: text/x-csrc
Size: 10544 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/sane-devel/attachments/20130802/111c238c/attachment.c>