On Thu, Aug 7, 2014 at 10:39 PM, Vinson Lee <[email protected]> wrote: > 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.
No, bit-wise operators don't short-circuit. _______________________________________________ Piglit mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/piglit
