On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 7:49 PM, Matt Turner <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 5:32 PM, Vinson Lee <[email protected]> wrote: >> Fixes Coverity "Unchecked return value" defects. >> >> Signed-off-by: Vinson Lee <[email protected]> >> --- >> .../spec/ext_unpack_subimage/ext_unpack_subimage.c | 24 >> +++++++++++----------- >> 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/tests/spec/ext_unpack_subimage/ext_unpack_subimage.c >> b/tests/spec/ext_unpack_subimage/ext_unpack_subimage.c >> index e65f4be..3935d92 100644 >> --- a/tests/spec/ext_unpack_subimage/ext_unpack_subimage.c >> +++ b/tests/spec/ext_unpack_subimage/ext_unpack_subimage.c >> @@ -156,19 +156,19 @@ piglit_display(void) >> 0, 0, 1, 1); >> >> if (extension_supported) { >> - pass &= piglit_probe_pixel_rgba(piglit_width / 2, >> - piglit_height / 4, >> - blue); >> - pass &= piglit_probe_pixel_rgba(piglit_width / 2, >> - piglit_height * 3 / 4, >> - cyan); >> + pass = piglit_probe_pixel_rgba(piglit_width / 2, >> + piglit_height / 4, >> + blue) && pass; >> + pass = piglit_probe_pixel_rgba(piglit_width / 2, >> + piglit_height * 3 / 4, >> + cyan) && pass; > > This is a fine change on its own, but can someone confirm my thinking > that this Coverity defect is just stupid? > > How is > > pass = pass & func(); > > not checking the function return?
If pass is false, then func() is not necessarily evaluated. _______________________________________________ Piglit mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/piglit
