Fatal error. Please report to developers. Log: 'ImgPreproc' '261'

Herr

Hi just reporting this error with the OAK-1:

[952.746] [system] [critical] Fatal error. Please report to developers. Log: 'ImgPreproc' '261'

Brandon

Thanks for the report! What DepthAI release version are you using?

Brandon

Ah just got some feedback from the team:

On this one, looks like a crop area larger than input frame size is attempted. Actually the crop area configured may not be contained fully in the input frame. There are several asserts there coming from internal firmware like this - we'll need to report meaningful errors instead of crashing.

And will also be helpful to auto-print the depthai version or FW version for asserts like this. FW version would be easier, embedded in the built FW.'

Added both to the roadmap here and here.

So it seems that most likely this is the case that the crop area is configured crop area is outside of the image frame.

Thoughts?

Thanks,
Brandon

Herr

Brandon
Using 2.8.0.0.dev0+9b04a4351006cb802b6a7d9ddb2cca01e5be56ac

This make sense, I am performing cropping in my code (depthai.node.ImageManip).

Brandon

Thanks and thanks!

Herr

Thank you!
I think these are the values that went in to it (from my log output just prior to the crash):
cfg.setCropRect(0.9951171875, 0.80517578125, 1.0, 0.87158203125)
Performed on a frame with dimmensions (720, 1280, 3)
Perhaps the crop is too small, or?
Running with the values mentioned consistently produce this:
[ImageManip(6)] [error] Processing failed, potentially unsupported config
Not the critical error.

I am also doing this:
setResize(64, 64)
setKeepAspectRatio(False)

Edit: not consistently perhaps, just got this again:
[critical] Fatal error. Please report to developers. Log: 'ImgPreproc' '261'
With these input values: 0.99560546875, 0.8076171875, 1.0, 0.873046875

Herr

The "[ImageManip(5)] [error] Processing failed, potentially unsupported config" error seems to go away by setting setKeepAspectRatio(True).

Luxonis-Alex

I can confirm the issue with Processing failed, potentially unsupported config. It may happen with smaller cropping areas (around 6 pixels here, 1280*(1.0 - 0.995), but also with up to 14 pixels in this config), that have to be upscaled to 64 (setResize). The algorithm selecting the best hardware scaler ratio has a problem here, and we'll need to fix it. The implementation is slightly different depending on setKeepAspectRatio.

But I can't reproduce this: [critical] Fatal error. Please report to developers. Log: 'ImgPreproc' '261'.
It's possible it could be triggered by floating point rounding of some values in firmware, but I tried with the input values mentioned on the last line above, and also slight variations, with no success in replicating. Was always getting the first error appearing at every frame: Processing failed ...

Could you check, does it happen consistently for you? Also it may be possible the values last printed were not yet received by the device, but some previous ones could have caused the problem.

Thanks!

Herr

Luxonis-Alex
Thank you for the information, so perhaps I should avoid cropping regions smaller then 15 pixels then.

I am not certain that the values posted produce the "Log: 'ImgPreproc' '261'", I cannot consistently get the error, so I am a bit confused.

Brandon suggested that this was related to cropping, hence I posted the last input values to the cropping function prior to the crash.

I cannot be certain that the issue is related to cropping, but the critical/fatal error do appear to occur around that point in the code.

You could be right that the values did not reach the device yet, but I also looked at the values prior to those posted here and they appeared very similar.

Herr

The cropping with setKeepAspectRatio(False) is practically unusable for me, it produces "[ImageManip(4)] [error] Processing failed, potentially unsupported config" quite often, something like 50% of the time. I keep changing the crop size based on detections in the image. Please have a look at the code with regards to aspect ratio.

Brandon

Thanks. We'll take a look and sorry about the trouble. We are planning on improving the ImageManip node (here and this seems like it should be included in that improvement.

CC: @themarpe .

Herr

Brandon
Thank you!

themarpe

@Herr thanks for starting this discussion - ImageManip requires some work to make it really general. I'll be looking into this hopefully at the end of next week.🙂