tree 2ccc4c349d5b90d77409314f395572e55bb65774
parent 1e33b3d28dbb00369b51a48433d5702373c58f60
author Tom Sepez <tsepez@chromium.org> 1691435931 +0000
committer Pdfium LUCI CQ <pdfium-scoped@luci-project-accounts.iam.gserviceaccount.com> 1691435931 +0000

Saturate, rather than CHECK() in FX_Number

The CHECK() introduced in
  https://pdfium-review.googlesource.com/c/pdfium/+/110970

was readily hit by the fuzzers. Keep them from tripping over this
condition by saturating instead (the behaviour is not well specified
so this seems reasonable).

Bug: chromium:1470690
Change-Id: Ib0230bd43dc67d2233ddccdb4c1004e3ad6e1347
Reviewed-on: https://pdfium-review.googlesource.com/c/pdfium/+/111030
Auto-Submit: Tom Sepez <tsepez@chromium.org>
Commit-Queue: Tom Sepez <tsepez@chromium.org>
Reviewed-by: Lei Zhang <thestig@chromium.org>