[jiri-god]

Processor::setOversamplingFactor() previously converted log2f(osFactor) to an integer before validating the argument. Zero and negative values produce a non-finite result; unsupported positive values could silently select another factor or disable an existing chain.

Accept only the supported factors 1, 2, 4 and 8, computing their exponents without floating-point conversion. Invalid requests leave the current processor state unchanged. Session-loader normalization is unchanged.

Validation on Apple Silicon macOS (RelWithDebInfo): all 58 CTest suites pass. The new OversamplerTests case checks valid transitions and rejects zero, negative values, non-powers of two, factors above the supported maximum and integer extremes, preserving the factor, latency and enabled state. It fails against unchanged upstream main. This is an API boundary regression, not a claim of a reproduced crash through the normal UI.

Independent host-only change based on d0226686; no private extensions.

Integration check: combined with #1211–#1214 and #1216, all 63 CTest suites pass (3.63 s). There is a textual overlap with #1212, which extracts applyOversamplingFactor(); in that combination the validation belongs in the extracted apply method.

[CLAassistant]

Thank you for your submission! We really appreciate it. Like many open source projects, we ask that you sign our Contributor License Agreement before we can accept your contribution.
_{You have signed the CLA already but the status is still pending? Let us recheck it.}

[jiri-god]

Hi Michael, Thanks for taking the time to review our PRs! Before signing the CLA, I wanted to check two things. The linked agreement is titled “SAP Individual Contributor License Agreement” and grants rights to SAP SE. Is that intentional, or was the default template left in place? I expected it to refer to Kushview, so I thought I’d ask first. I also want to be transparent about how these contributions were developed: I’m working extensively with AI coding agents. I guide the work and test the results, but much of the implementation and the automated tests are written by the agents, rather than by me personally. Given the CLA’s statement about being the sole author, I’d like to clarify how you handle AI-assisted contributions and whether you’d like any particular disclosure in the PRs. I don’t want to sign something that inaccurately describes how the code was produced. Happy to follow your preferred approach, and thanks again for considering the fixes! Best, Jiří

…

On 30. 10. 2026, at 8:32, CLAassistant ***@***.***> wrote: CLAassistant left a comment (kushview/element#1215) <#1215 (comment)> <https://cla-assistant.io/kushview/element?pullRequest=1215> Thank you for your submission! We really appreciate it. Like many open source projects, we ask that you sign our Contributor License Agreement <https://cla-assistant.io/kushview/element?pullRequest=1215> before we can accept your contribution. You have signed the CLA already but the status is still pending? Let us recheck <https://cla-assistant.io/check/kushview/element?pullRequest=1215> it. — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#1215?email_source=notifications&email_token=CMBS3O5KNJJFRRMZFOKTUYD5WQ72FA5CNFSNUABFM5UWIORPF5TWS5BNNB2WEL2JONZXKZKDN5WW2ZLOOQXTMNJRG42DGMJUHEYKM4TFMFZW63VGMF2XI2DPOKSWK5TFNZ2KYZTPN52GK4S7MNWGSY3L#issuecomment-6517431490>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/CMBS3O5VVYW4CGQ7HJNHAED5WQ72FAVCNFSNUABFKJSXA33TNF2G64TZHMZDCNRYHE3TMNRZHNEXG43VMU5TMMJRGUYTCMRTG4ZKC5QC>. You are receiving this because you authored the thread.