Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

20241002-fix-for-cppcheck-force-source #8039

Merged

Conversation

douzzer
Copy link
Contributor

@douzzer douzzer commented Oct 3, 2024

src/internal.c: in ProcessReplyEx() in the verifyMessage case, refactor some gating/conditionalization around ATOMIC_USER, HAVE_ENCRYPT_THEN_MAC, atomicUser, and ssl->options.startedETMRead, to avoid "Logical disjunction always evaluates to true" from cppcheck incorrectLogicOperator (via multi-test cppcheck-force-source) (warned code introduced by 99a99e3).

tested with wolfssl-multi-test.sh ... super-quick-check cppcheck-force-source

@douzzer douzzer requested a review from SparkiDev October 3, 2024 00:02
@douzzer douzzer force-pushed the 20241002-fix-for-cppcheck-force-source branch from 7f31cc8 to 2d7979e Compare October 3, 2024 00:11
…or some gating/conditionalization around ATOMIC_USER, HAVE_ENCRYPT_THEN_MAC, atomicUser, and ssl->options.startedETMRead, to avoid "Logical disjunction always evaluates to true" from cppcheck incorrectLogicOperator (via multi-test cppcheck-force-source) (warned code introduced by 99a99e3).
@douzzer douzzer force-pushed the 20241002-fix-for-cppcheck-force-source branch from 2d7979e to b81cc50 Compare October 3, 2024 00:19
@douzzer
Copy link
Contributor Author

douzzer commented Oct 3, 2024

retest this please

@SparkiDev SparkiDev merged commit 0668c6e into wolfSSL:master Oct 3, 2024
139 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants