)]}'
{
  "commit": "c1c25bb7acd85b3f8d20f4e643e163499f303393",
  "tree": "2ccc4c349d5b90d77409314f395572e55bb65774",
  "parents": [
    "1e33b3d28dbb00369b51a48433d5702373c58f60"
  ],
  "author": {
    "name": "Tom Sepez",
    "email": "tsepez@chromium.org",
    "time": "Mon Aug 07 19:18:51 2023 +0000"
  },
  "committer": {
    "name": "Pdfium LUCI CQ",
    "email": "pdfium-scoped@luci-project-accounts.iam.gserviceaccount.com",
    "time": "Mon Aug 07 19:18:51 2023 +0000"
  },
  "message": "Saturate, rather than CHECK() in FX_Number\n\nThe CHECK() introduced in\n  https://pdfium-review.googlesource.com/c/pdfium/+/110970\n\nwas readily hit by the fuzzers. Keep them from tripping over this\ncondition by saturating instead (the behaviour is not well specified\nso this seems reasonable).\n\nBug: chromium:1470690\nChange-Id: Ib0230bd43dc67d2233ddccdb4c1004e3ad6e1347\nReviewed-on: https://pdfium-review.googlesource.com/c/pdfium/+/111030\nAuto-Submit: Tom Sepez \u003ctsepez@chromium.org\u003e\nCommit-Queue: Tom Sepez \u003ctsepez@chromium.org\u003e\nReviewed-by: Lei Zhang \u003cthestig@chromium.org\u003e\n",
  "tree_diff": [
    {
      "type": "modify",
      "old_id": "4e58490bb48dc2d4b2b62c06c07bddcbc3eb8864",
      "old_mode": 33188,
      "old_path": "core/fxcrt/fx_number.cpp",
      "new_id": "d577531f95582e30c1d9431c1e5f1f2789689b38",
      "new_mode": 33188,
      "new_path": "core/fxcrt/fx_number.cpp"
    },
    {
      "type": "modify",
      "old_id": "ebfdfe7ae7a3d4259a67bcd20a995c37d702acfa",
      "old_mode": 33188,
      "old_path": "core/fxcrt/fx_number_unittest.cpp",
      "new_id": "9a1d2eb4c2ded19abb34a4eeed451f3e8e740ad1",
      "new_mode": 33188,
      "new_path": "core/fxcrt/fx_number_unittest.cpp"
    }
  ]
}